How you organize you books is like love and oxygen

There are few hobbies people love to brag about (and exaggerate) more than how much they read.

The truth is that most of us don't read much. But those of us who do tend to want to tell everyone how much we love it. How we read 85 books last year. How nothing beats snuggling up with a good book. How all you need is books. (Or maybe that's love. Or oxygen. Or maybe love is like oxygen, you get too much and you get too high, not enough and you're gonna die–as Sweet warned us in their 1978 song that has little to do with this discussion.)

Back to books, or more specifically, ownership of books. According to a survey by the folks at YouGov.com, 85% of Americans say they own at least one book (the physical kind, not one on an electronic device). The other 15% is made up of 9% who don't own a book and 6% who don't know (which means they don't own a book, right?).

Twenty-four percent of us own at least 100 books. And 7% of Americans own at least 1,000 books.

One-thousand!

The most interesting question in that survey wasn't even about how many books people owned. The best question (which dives deeply into how our brains work) is how we organize our books.

For starters, the obvious outcome: People who own 10 or fewer books don't really have an organizational method because they don't need one. That's true in the same way I don't organize my phones or thumbs. I have so few that they don't need organization (although I prefer to keep my thumbs on the opposite end of my hand from my little fingers).

People probably need to organize books when they get to 100 or so.

So think again: If you had 200 (or 800, 15,000) books, how would you organize them?

By title? Author? Color? Genre?

Well, according to the survey, the most common way for people with many books to organize their collection is by genre or subject matter (another word for genre, right?). That's by far the leading way: 37% of people with 100 or more books use that system. The next most common way for people with 100 or more books to organize is alphabetically by the author's name, which is tied with . . . by size.

Really? By size? That seems like something an 8-year-old would do, not something a 50-year-old would do. I apologize to 50-year-old readers who organize their books by size. If that's you, remember that the "Where's Waldo" books are big, so they go on the end.

There are other ways that a few people use: Alphabetically by title, by color, by another system (possibilities: Alphabetically by the first word on Page 8, by the attractiveness of the author, by the order they were acquired).

How we organize things is fascinating. If you don't think it's personalized, try going into someone's kitchen sometime and look at their spice rack. Or time travel to when people other than hipsters had record albums and look at their album collections. Where would you find the album by Sweet that had "Love is Like Oxygen" on it? Was it by genre (New Wave? Glam rock? Pop?)? Was it by the name of the band or album ("Level Headed" in this case)? Was it randomly?

Organization is so personalized that it's impossible to know what to expect from anyone, which is why the Dewey Decimal system, launched in 1876 and used in libraries is so brilliant.

Without the Dewey Decimal system you could go into a library and discover that the books are organized by whatever seemed right to the librarian: "Oh, you need 'Grapes of Wrath?' I think that's a paperback, so it's either in the green section or next to books that are the same size. Good luck."

Maybe we should organize books at our home by the Dewey Decimal system, too. Make it mandatory.

That would be sweet.

Like the band that performed "Love is Like Oxygen."

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

Data provides a scientific prediction for today's Super Bowl

Today is the ultimate game: Super Bowl 58 (I refuse to use Roman numerals. I haven't used them since I was forced to learn about them when I was XIV years old. They're II hard II remember, like trying to remember what you VIII for dinner a week ago).

Today's game matches two of the NFL's preseason favorites, the San Francisco 49ers and the Kansas City Chiefs. If this sounds familiar, it's because it is: The teams met in the Super Bowl four years ago, when the Chiefs stole a 31-20 victory that was (according to a rumor I just made up), the decisive moment in the spread of the COVID-19 virus that hammered the globe a month later.

It really should be called the Chiefs virus.

So who wins today? As a longtime sports fan and former sports editor, I rely on the same tool that I trusted to help us deal with the pandemic that the Chiefs released on us four years ago: Science. Or  more accurately, data, which isn't science, but play along with me.

Numerous factors will determine today's final score and they're listed here. Experts have analyzed the information and provided a specific point total for each category. Ready? Here are the factors for today's game:

Regular season wins: We start simple. The 49ers won 12 games, the Chiefs 11. We multiply that by six and it's six points for the 49ers.

Commercials: This is ranked on a scale of one to seven. The Chiefs have those Patrick Mahomes (and Andy Reid) State Farm commercials that are pretty funny. Add Travis Kelce (see below) and then compare it to the 49ers' local commercials. This is a blowout. Chiefs get seven.

City image: San Francisco is one of the world's most famous cities. It's the Golden Gate. It was the center of the Summer of Love. There are probably a dozen songs about it. Even people who claim San Francisco is overrun with homeless drug abusers know about the city. Kansas City? It's where the Chiefs play. That's all we know. 49ers get 11 points for this. It's not even close.

Star players: Patrick Mahomes is the biggest star in the NFL and Travis Kelce is famous for football and other reasons (see below). Even though the Niners have their share of stars (Christian McCaffery, Nick Bosa, Deebo Samuel, Brock Purdy), it's a win for the Chiefs. Four points for Kansas City.

History: The Chiefs won two of the past four Super Bowls and are playing in their fourth Super Bowl in five years. But . . . the 49ers are in their eighth Super Bowl and have five championships. Tradition says the 49ers get six points for this.

Players' significant others: Kristin Juszczyk, the wife of 49ers fullback Kyle Juszczyk, became famous when she designed a jacket for a blonde woman who is somehow related to or friends with someone on the Chiefs and that woman got on TV. People loved the jacket. Nobody on the Chiefs has a wife or girlfriend even half as famous as Kristin Juszczyk. Four points for the 49ers.

Famous brothers: Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce is famous because of a relationship: He is the brother of All-Pro center Jason Kelce. Nick Bosa's brother Joey is an NFL player, but he's not Jason Kelce famous. Six points for the Chiefs.

That's it. That's the data. Add up the points and get the final score. This would have been a blowout, but Travis Kelce has a relationship with someone famous. His brother.

San Francisco 27, Kansas City 17

Reach Brad Stanhope at brad.stanhope@outlook.com.

One generation thinks happiness costs at lot more than the rest of us

I once suggested millennials – people born between 1981 and 1996 – were the greatest generation. Of course, I made that declaration because I rely on those people to keep me employed. Also, both of my sons are millennials and I may need them at some point. Still, I was on board with that generation.

But a recent survey on how different generations view financial matters made me spit out my discount baby boomer coffee.

The big picture: According to a Harris survey, 59% of Americans believe you can buy happiness. That's an unsurprising conclusion, although it suggests that most people don't see the miserable rich in our culture. You can, of course, make the case that having more money relieves pressure and makes you less unhappy, I guess. So maybe money can make you less unhappy? I don't know.

To be fair, the answers were more nuanced than, "gimme more money." People said they wanted the ability to pay bills on time, purchase a home and live debt-free. Those are all good things, but still . . . the consensus was that more money would bring more happiness.

The coffee-spit part came when people were asked how much money they'd need each year to be happier. In other words, what annual wage would make you happy?

Those in Gen Z (born 1997-2012) said $128,000. Members of Gen X (born 1965-1980) said $130,000. Baby boomers (born 1946-1964) said $124,000. All of those figures are vastly higher than the national median family income of about $75,000 but are all similar: People born from 1946 to 1980 and those born from 1997 to 2012 all said around $125,000 annually would make them happy.

Millennials were asked the same question: How much would you need to earn annually to be happy?

Their figure was . . . are you ready?

$526,000.

Per year.

Yes. Millennials think they need a half-million dollars per year to be happy. Their amount to be happy is more than four times more than any other generation thinks they need to be happy.

What? Really?

I mean, I understand that a person would think they'd be happier if they made a half-million dollars a year, but do those millennials (the youngest of whom will turn 28 this year, so they're not children) realize that less than 2% of American households earn more than $500,000 a year? Do they think they need to be in the top 1% of all households to be happy?

I'm a baby boomer nearing retirement. I own a home and have a reasonable 401(k) account. I'm the target of the young people who insist that you could purchase a huge home while working at a fast food restaurant when I was young.

That's not true, of course.

But if you think you have to earn $500,000 a year to be happy, you probably think every boomer was rich when they were young (Adjusting for inflation, the 1985 equivalent of $500,000  was $183,000 per year. Not only did I make less than 10% of that in 1985, I'm pretty sure I had no same-age friends who made $40,000).

Money surveys are interesting. We use them to measure our standing. We use them to understand others' perceptions about "normal." 

The fact that millennials (at least those in this survey) think they need to earn a half-million dollars to be happy leads to one conclusion: An overwhelming number of them will never be happy, which makes me sad.

It reminds me of the old story about when John D. Rockefeller, America's first billionaire, was asked by a reporter how much money was enough. Rockefeller replied, "Just a little bit more."

Millennials apparently would say, "just a whole lot more."

Reach Brad Stanhope, a grumpy, judgmental baby boomer, at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

Basic office tasks are not always an Excel-lent adventure

Few things are more confounding than Excel.

I work with Microsoft's spreadsheets occasionally, but if you ask me to create a formula, you'll find me stumped. Sure, I can Google how to do it, but as soon as I apply a formula (likely taking two or three times to get it right), I forget.

My ignorance about Excel formulas is a mystery to Mrs. Brad, who works in spreadsheets all the time.

"It's simple," she'll tell me, when I ask for help. Then she'll tell me something like, "Just click in the top cell, then type in equal symbol and the symbols for alpha and skullduggery, followed by a semicolon, then the formula, using PC smart key symbols  rather than the keyboard. After that, type in the monkeypod symbol and drag the cursor down to apply the formula to the entire column. See? It's simple."

Something like that.

Well, if misery loves company, a recent study of office workers provides me with plenty of company.

According to VoiceNation, a telecommunication service that probably wants to sell its services, 81% of U.S. office workers say they struggle with Excel formulas. That was the takeaway from a survey that indicated that 37% of office workers struggle with everyday tasks required of them.

The difference between 81% of us struggling with Excel formulas and only 37% (still a very high number!) struggling with everyday tasks is presumably because most workers aren't required to use Excel in their jobs. They have other issues: 

• 77% struggle with formatting Word documents,
• 76% struggle to review documents with tracked changes,
• 75% struggle to format presentations,
• 73% struggle with software designed to set up meetings, and
• 70% struggle with screen sharing on video calls.

There are a lot more, but you get the point: People who work in offices often have a hard time with the basic tasks that their supervisors assume they've mastered. For those of us who struggle, it often feels like our co-workers all know how to do everything, as they blast through a task or send us a document with tracked changes for review or ask us to share your screen on a call while we mumble, then ask, "Can you see it now? How about now?" only to hear them say they can't see our screen.

The authors of the report based on the survey suggested that this indicates the need for better onboarding and more communication with supervisors. However, the data revealed that most of us would rather Google the answer to our problems rather than ask our supervisors, possibly because our supervisor is off-site and may ask us to share our screen with them.

"Can you see it now?" we picture ourselves asking. "How about now?" And our supervisor will say, "No, I can't. Wait a minute, now I can. Except I think this is the other screen. Are you watching a YouTube video of Jim Carrey's funniest movie scenes while working? And where's that Excel document I asked you to send me?"

Technology – even old tech, like Excel – is tough. I know how to do almost all of my job functions, but still take comfort in the fact that I'm not alone in sometimes being mystified by tasks that everyone else seems to have mastered.

Turns out everyone hasn't mastered Excel.

Except Mrs. Brad, who will gladly tell me how to write an Excel formula the next time I want to be totally baffled.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

Funny Columnist finds a trick to improve SEO performance

I recently discussed with a co-worker an archaic way to get an advantage for your business.

She told me her father was tasked decades ago with naming a new company division. He looked at the phone book, noticed the trend and went with a name that started with two or three As, making it one of the first things people would see when they opened the directory.

"There's nothing like that now," I told her. "There's probably some consultants who will tell you how to get better SEO (search engine optimization), but it's not the same."

Hours later, I realized I was wrong.

I read an article on The Verge that discussed a new restaurant in New York named "Thai Food Near Me," and went into detail on the number of businesses taking a similar path: Dentist Near Me. Plumber Near Me. Barber Shop Near Me. Christmas Trees Near Me.

The idea is simple, but in case you don't recognize it, here's the reason: When you use Google (or presumably another search engine, but who uses anything but Google?) to find a good Thai restaurant or dentist or plumber or barbershop or Christmas tree lot, the search engine will give you the option of doing the search to find those close to you.

So type in "Thai food" and one auto-fill option will be "Thai food near me."

I use it all the time. So if you name your restaurant Thai Food Near Me, it will generally come up early in that search, even if it's not, you know, near you.

This is brilliant. And devious. And fascinating.

Not surprisingly, Google says that the naming convention doesn't really work. Google says the actual proximity of the restaurant or store or barber shop or plumber is crucial, as is how prominent the business is (Starbucks shows up better in searches than a local coffee house) and how much detail the business provides (because Google has an insatiable appetite for information).

Still . . . it kind of works. I say that primarily because I don't trust what Google says about its business practices.

Going with that name puts it in the possibilities for the search. Also, it creates more attention (at least at the start), leading to media coverage and social media posts, which lead to more prominence, which leads to higher visibility on the search engine.

I recently did a search for "Thai Food Near Me" and the New York restaurant didn't appear, but apparently it shows up at or near the top for New Yorkers, which is the target audience. I assume Barber Shop Near Me and Christmas Trees Near Me work equally well.

Here's the point: People will always look for a shortcut. Whether it's calling your business AAA Plumbing or Plumber Near Me, every little bit helps. And it's encouraging to know that in an era of artificial intelligence and business consultants, we still have regular people who are using their wits in an attempt to outsmart the system and gain an advantage.

If I didn't think that was true, I wouldn't have changed my name to Funny Columnist.

Reach Funny Columnist at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

Fighting the battle for sideburns one day at a time

Old habits are hard to break – especially grooming habits

The backstory: I was asked during a recent haircut why I don't have sideburns. I don't have sideburns? I guess not. 

I don't know why. There's a faint memory of someone cutting my hair and asking, "Do you want your hair to square off with the top of your ears?" I took it as a suggestion and said yes.

It's possible – maybe probable – that they asked because that's how my hair was already cut. That it was confirmation, not a suggestion.

I now realize that having no sideburns at all is unusual and that I've been that way for a long time. Does anyone else notice? Do some of my co-workers refer to me as "that sideburn-less freak? Do people at the grocery store snicker after I leave?

I suspect not. I suspect no one notices.

But still . . . why don't I have sideburns?

I told the hairstylist that as a youngster I didn't want sideburns because I associated them with my dad's styles from the 1970s (powder-blue suits, long sideburns, zippered leather boots, Old Spice aftershave), as well as with country music stars of that era. I didn't want to look like Merle Haggard, for crying out loud.

But why none at all? I have no idea. It seemed like no big deal, but I checked some websites, which were unanimous that men should have some sort of sideburns. I don't.

When did I lose them? A quick check through a few old photos showed that the last time I clearly had sideburns of any type was in the early 2000s. After that, it gets fuzzy (the facts, not the sideburns). For sure, I had none by about 2013.

Anyway, I decided to grow my sideburns out a little. I need to be modern.

The hairstylist (and websites) suggested I grow them down to at least the middle of my ears, so I announced the change to Mrs. Brad (who then began telling me which NBA players have sideburns and which don't, ignoring the fact that those without sideburns tend to be young, African-American and have fade haircuts).

The next day, I started to grow sideburns by shaving at mid-ear level down. It was difficult, because my default shaving style is to start high. I don't really think about it.

But I was determined.

I left the sideburns again the next day. And the next. And the next. There was a little peach fuzz, although not much (do my sideburns grow slowly? Maybe that's why I eliminated them!).

The next day I started shaving and boom! I realized I'd started at the normal level. I'd eliminated a week's worth of growth on the right side. I had to start all over!

I told Mrs. Brad, who laughed. I decided to allow the left side to remain and figured the right side would catch up.

A few days later, I finished shaving and realized I'd again shaved the old way – starting at the top of my ear, not the middle. This time, I'd eliminated a few days' worth of fuzz on the right side and 10 days' worth on the left.

So, I started again. One of my goals for 2024 is to grow my sideburns to the point that the internet isn't making fun of me. As of this writing, I'm still going. I'm trying to change my habits, which are proving difficult.

As the old song goes, "It's harder to face up to the mirror, leave all the habits on the shelf."

Oh no! That's from a Merle Haggard song! It's already happening!

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

Knowing the word of the year reveals whether you have rizz

Choosing a "word of the year" – an honor you may not know exists – is a little bit like picking Academy Award winners or members of sports halls of fame. It's all in the eye of the beholder.

And in the final month of 2023 we saw different organizations pick words of the year.(remember: We're now in 2024! If you still write the date anywhere, you'll be tempted to write 2023. Don't. Although if you're like me, you'll occasionally date something by starting with "19 . . ." and then realize you're in another millennium).

The Big Three organizations in the word of the year arena – Oxford, Merriam-Webster and Dictionary.com – picked different words, although two were similar. All are instructive and all give us pause to consider what's coming in 2024.

Before we get there, a challenge: What word emerged for you in 2023? What was the dominant word in 2023?

For me, "arthritis" comes to mind. And "Brock Purdy." And "pizza," like every year. But none of them were named word of the year.

Here are the winners: For Oxford, it was "rizz" (I'll explain later). For Merriam-Webster, it was "authentic" and for Dictionary.com, it was "hallucinate." 

The latter two are associated with artificial intelligence: Authentic indicates something not created by AI, hallucinate now means error-filled writing by AI.

That makes sense. The coming of AI was one of the dominant cultural themes of 2023 and the desire to not be fooled by AI is prominent.

Rizz, as promised, is short for "charisma," despite having two "Z"s and sounding vaguely obscene. If you've got rizz, people will believe what you say is authentic, even if it's a hallucination.

The prominence of a theme for the biggest words of 2023 echoes previous years. In 2020, for instance, Dictionary.com and Merriam-Webster each picked "pandemic."  In 2021, Merriam-Webster and Oxford picked "vaccine" and "vax." 

While the ritual of picking a word of the year is a modern construct, I can confidently say that the word of the year in 1347 for all three organizations would have been "plague" and the word of the year in 1794 would have been "guillotine."

The year's big cultural trends tend to be the year's top word. In 2004, Dictionary.com chose "blog" and the next year Oxford chose "podcast." Those words are only 20 years old!

So what should we expect in 2024? Based on my research over the first six days of the year, the word of the year should be "2024." However, I suspect some sort of technology or a political movement or the coming Super Bowl will have an impact (Purdyism? Bosa? Deebo?).

The word of the year tells you plenty about the 12-month period. If we only knew 2024's top word, we'd be better prepared, although it's unclear whether we have enough rizz to provide an authentic choice and avoid a hallucination.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

 

Reasons to look ahead to 2024

It's the final day of an eventful year – but we're on the brink of what might be worse.

If I ask you to name the biggest events of 2023, you might struggle, so here are a few you may have forgotten: Titan submersible implodes, killing five people;  school shooting; Trump indictment;  attack on Israel by Hamas and subsequent war; Russian attack on Ukraine continues; school shooting; Trump indictment; Barbie vs. Oppenheimer in summer movies; Kevin McCarthy ousted as House Speaker and chaos ensues; Maui wildfires; school shooting; Trump indictment; Dodgers collapse again in playoffs.

With many people expecting some terrible drama to unfold over the next 12 months – highlighted by what threatens to be the ugliest presidential election in American history – let's take a deep breath and consider some other things that will happen in 2024. 

Things that don't make you dislike your family members or neighbors. Things that don't make you angry or afraid whenever you think of them.

Remember these things as you are bombarded by frightening images and news over the next 12 months. It's not all bad.

1. There are people in your life whom you love and who love you. Even if it feels like everything is coming apart on a big scale, remember that there are people who are concerned about you and vice-versa. Everybody isn't fighting everyone else.

2. Technology causes concerns, but remember that you now have the world at your fingertips. We have more entertainment options than at any time in human history and we regularly participate in the miraculous (Mobile phones! Airplane travel! Microwaved food! GPS mapping!). Try to celebrate the amazing things you can do at least as much as you lament the problems of technology.

3. What do you call a one-legged hippo? A hoppo. See, even in the middle of a newspaper column, you can find pleasure (or anger. Let's say "you can find strong emotion.")

4. The Dodgers may have three of the five best hitters in baseball and an All-Star pitching staff, but they'll still probably lose in the playoffs. That feeling? Germans call it schadenfreude, which means "A Dodgers loss."

5. It's an election year, but it's also a Summer Olympics year. That means this summer's Paris Olympics (late July through mid-August) will give you another chance to care about beach volleyball, taekwondo, artistic swimming, weightlifting and more for the last time until 2028 (when the Olympics are in Los Angeles!). You will also get the opportunity to be proud of our country because we create great track and gymnastics performers.

6. You will do plenty of good things. A fact of life: When evaluating things, we look forward much more than we look back, which means we're much more aware of what we need to do than what we've done. That gets things done, but here's a suggestion for 2024: If you routinely make "to-do" lists, consider making a "done" list so you can reflect on what you've accomplished. In the next 12 months, you will undoubtedly do some major things and likely forget them.

7. You survived the COVID-19 pandemic. Medical people are reluctant to call the pandemic over, but let's face it: COVID killed 350,000 Americans in 2020, 460,000 in 2021 and fewer than 70,000 in 2023, likely dropping it out of the top 10 causes of death. You survived a pandemic that people will discuss for the rest of your life. If you were told in mid-2020 that you'd be fine in 2024, you would have taken it.

8. When you get stressed, see No. 1.

Reach Brad Stanhope at brad.stanhope@outlook.com.

It's beginning to look a lot like . . . my annual Solano quiz

"It's a Wonderful Life" on TV, the burning of the yule log, college football bowl games sponsored by companies you've never heard of, crowded shopping malls and shockingly early sunsets. All December traditions.

It's time for another, my annual Solano County quiz. I started this December tradition in the late 19th century, when Hezekiah McNaughton first launched the Daily Republic as The Weekly Wind-Blown Emporium and Newsatorium. It has appeared uninterrupted for the past 137 years.

The rules are simple. See how many of the following 20 questions about Solano County can you answer correctly. Googling is discouraged and educated guesses are encouraged. Correct answers are provided at the end.

If you live in the county, you should be able to get some of these right. Get your pen or pencil . . . I'll wait.

Ready? Go!

1. Name the seven incorporated Solano County cities.

2. Within five years, when was Fairfield incorporated as a city?

3. What was Solano County's largest cash crop in 2022?

4. Name the four Interstate freeways in Solano County.

5. Name the five state highways in Solano County.

6. Where have all the flowers gone?

7. Name the five counties that are adjacent to Solano County.

8. Within 100,000, what was Solano County's population in 2020?

9. What was the last presidential election in which Solano County voted Republican?

10. What month has the average highest daily temperature in Fairfield?

11. Within 200 miles, how long a drive is it from Fairfield to Fairfield, Connecticut?

12. How many public schools are in Suisun City?

13. Name at least two of the three members of the House of Representatives who represent parts of Solano County.

14. Of the two major prisons in Vacaville (California Medical Facility and California State Prison Solano), which had more inmates as of Dec. 1?

15. Based on the Census Bureau's 2022 estimates, is Fairfield among the 300 most populated cities in the United States?

16. In 2022, what Solano County did financial news and opinion company 24/7 Wall St. determine to be the "most diverse small town in America?"

17. In what cities are the two general aviation airports in Solano County?

18. Within 1,000, how many students attend Solano Community College?

19.  In what year did Brig. Gen. Robert Travis die in a plane crash at what was then called the Fairfield-Suisun Air Force Base?

20. What is five times five?

ANSWERS

1. Benicia, Dixon, Fairfield, Rio Vista, Suisun City, Vacaville, Vallejo.

2. 1903.

3. Tomatoes (for the first time in seven years).

4. 80, 505, 680, 780.

5. 12, 29, 37, 84, 113.

6. Young girls have picked them, every one. When will they ever learn?

7. Contra Costa, Napa, Sacramento, Sonoma, Yolo.

8. 453,491.

9. 1984, when Ronald Reagan got 54.5% of the vote.

10. July, at 89.6 degrees (August is 89.2 degrees).

11. 2,916 miles.

12. Four (Suisun Elementary, Crescent Elementary, Dan O. Root Elementary, Crystal Middle).

13. Mike Thompson, John Garamendi and Doris Matsui (who represents a tiny slice of Solano).

14. California State Prison Solano had 2,594 inmates as of Dec. 1, 276 more than CMF.

15. Yes. It ranks 245th in the nation.

16. Vallejo, with a 77% chance that any two residents would be of a different census racial category.

17. Rio Vista and Vacaville.

18. 9,500.

19. 1950. The base was renamed for Travis a year later.

20. 25, in case you need a right answer to feel good enough to retake this quiz next year.

SCORING

15-20 correct: Brilliant.

10-14: Pretty smart.

5-9: Smart.

0-4: Resilient.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

2023 was a year of miraculous changes in NBA, MLB

When sports historians look back on 2023, they'll consider it the year of miracles – not because of an incredible feat or unbelievable comeback.

But because the people who run to major American sports made brilliant decisions. That was previously unthinkable – especially when you consider one of the sports is baseball, which has a long history of short-sighted and or much-delayed decisions.

In 2023, the leadership of Major League Baseball and the NBA each made wildly successful changes, despite plenty of doubt about both moves before their respective seasons. In an era when it seemed like only the NFL could make good decisions (if you define "good decision" as "something that makes more people watch, thus making more money for the owners"), baseball and the NBA were brilliant.

Start with baseball, which instituted a series of rule changes to increase the game's pace and add action. Traditionalists were convinced that adding a pitch clock and outlawing the shift (where three infielders play on one side of the infield because data shows a hitter on the other team almost exclusively hits the ball that way) would be the end of the world. Because when Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and Willie Mays played, those weren't the rules.

However, those changes and others (larger bases and a limit on pickoff throws by a pitcher to encourage base stealing), brought spectacular results. The games were faster and had more action.

The average game time in 2023 dropped by 24 minutes, from three hours, and four minutes to two hours and 40 minutes. Baseball in 2023 had the shortest average game time since 1985. Baseball also had more action, with more hits, more stolen bases and more runs. Meanwhile, attendance increased by nearly 10%, surpassing 70 million fans.

Shorter games, more action, more fans. 

These changes were made by owners who traditionally wait until something is a problem for a decade before they form a committee to look into appointing a blue-ribbon panel to study whether they should consider evaluating the situation.

Baseball got it right. And baseball kept the rules in place for the postseason, again getting it right.

Who knew Major League Baseball could make a collective good decision?

Meanwhile, the NBA – pushed by Commissioner Adam Silver – adopted an in-season tournament to build fan interest early in the season. Most observers mocked it, suggesting players wouldn't care and that fans would spend more time ridiculing it than following it.

Wrong and wrong.

The tournament – which ended last weekend when the Lakers beat the Pacers in Las Vegas – featured crazily-decorated courts, players who really wanted to win and fans treating it like a big deal (particularly teams like Indiana, which hasn't seen much success in recent years). The championship game felt like it meant something, with players absolutely locked in and the Lakers genuinely celebrating their championship.

The result? While the NBA remains far, far, far behind the NFL in attention from most fans, the sport garnered some attention ahead of the traditional Christmas games that generally serve to remind fans that the sport exists (despite the season being about one-third over by then).

There's plenty that went wrong in sports this year: Professional golf remains a mess, realignment of major conferences revealed the incredibly greedy underbelly of collegiate sports, the Dodgers got the best free agent in a generation and more.

But the leadership of Major League Baseball and the NBA made changes that had many people dubious. And those changes succeeded wildly.

Let's enjoy it while we can because history suggests this surely won't last.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.