Softball Ivy Preview — Three at the Top, Five More in the Hunt

By wpengine | March 12, 2003

As with other sports in the Ivy League, softball has been struck by parity. On any given weekend, each team in the league is capable of beating another. Cornell, Princeton, and Harvard will likely battle for the league crown, while the other five teams will fight for survival.

Princeton

2002: 34-18, 13-1 Ivy

The Ivy League’s representative in the NCAA tournament a season ago, Princeton must deal with the loss of two-time Ivy League Pitcher of the Year Brie Galicinao. The Tigers still have three capable pitchers, though, in junior Wendy Bingham, sophomore Melissa Finley, and freshman Erin Snyder. Bingham won eight of 12 decisions last year and had a 1.70 ERA.

Besides being the top pitcher in the league, Galicinao was also one of the top hitters, so her absence will be felt. However, Princeton returns Kristin Del Calvo, one of the top sluggers in the league. Her .340 batting average, 12 home runs, and 42 RBI put her among the league leaders in 2002.

Harvard

2002: 31-10, 12-2

The Crimson, which always seems to challenge for the Ivy League crown, will return most of its main cogs from a season ago, including Ivy League Player of the Year Tiffany Whitton. In 2002, Whitton led the league with a .457 batting average, adding 13 homers and 49 RBI. Whitton will have help in the lineup in the form of sophomore speedster Lauren Stefanchik, who led the league with 21 stolen bases and was third in the Ivies with a .365 average.

Harvard also returns ace hurler Kara Brotemarkle, who sparkled with a 1.85 ERA, while striking out 107 batters in her 113.1 innings.

Dartmouth

2002: 26-20, 6-8

Dartmouth, which finished in the middle of the pack last year, will likely do so again this season. The Green features a solid pitching staff which includes a very tough Christine Quattrocchi. Quattrocchi held opponents to a .224 batting average last season en route to a 5-4 record. Karin Edwardson also returns to the mound for the Green after posting an 8-3 record with a 1.81 ERA. She’ll need to continue her excellence in 2003.

The lineup is filled with scrappy hitters who run the bases extremely well. The Green stole 37 bases as a team last season and will look to put pressure on opposing defenses with its speed again this year.

Brown

2002: 14-22, 6-8

Brown will look towards 2003 as a rebuilding year. Table-setter Laura Leonetti, who hit .348 last season, will need to energize the Bears’ offense again. Outside of Leonetti, Brown has had a hard time getting runners on base and driving them in, as it averaged less than three runs per game.

Senior Erin Durlesser will return as the staff ace, but she must improve upon her 3.44 ERA to keep Brown in games. Sophomore Marissa Berkes will be looked upon to better her rookie campaign, in which she won five of her 11 starts.

Columbia

2002: 27-23, 5-9

The Lions have three of the finest pitchers in the league, but they must find a way to put more runs on the board to make a run at the Ivy crown. Columbia, which posted a team ERA of 1.60, is led by All-Ivy performer Allison Buehler. Although she surrendered just 43 runs in 29 starts, she finished just 12-12 on the year, in large part because of Columbia’s impotent offense.

First baseman Marisa Marconi is the Lions’ top returning hitter, but she only had six RBI last season. The big question surrounding the team is how it will perform under interim head coach Kayla Noonan.

Yale

2002: 22-22-1, 5-9

The Bulldogs are expecting big things this season, but in order to make noise in the league, they’ll have to get solid pitching. Yale lost two of its top three pitchers to graduation in the form of Cara Denver and Shayna Filson. However, it does return Jillian Miles, who went 9-7 in 21 starts in 2002. But one pitcher can’t do it alone, so it’ll be crucial that freshman pitchers Margaret Hunt and Ashley Linnenbank step up.

Third baseman Jessica Bartholomew has been a rock at the hot corner and will continue to provide stability in the lineup.

Penn

2002: 14-33, 1-13

Penn struggled mightily a season ago, and there isn’t much reason for optimism this time around. The Quakers have one of the best coaches in the league in Carol Kashow, but it might not be enough. The team lost standout Jennifer Moore to graduation, which will leave a huge void in the lineup. Crista Farrell, however, is one of the better shortstops in the league and is a pest on the basepaths.

Nicole Borgstadt is the pitcher to watch. After putting up a 2.95 ERA, she seems primed to become an elite hurler.

Archived article by Alex Ip

March Madness

By wpengine March 13, 2003

Best Picture of the Year Gonna Win: The Academy will be reluctant to bestow the award upon J.R.R. Tolkien’s classic tale, just as they were hesitant last year, when they preferred the more profound A Beautiful Mind. The Hours, though graceful with high caliber acting, may be too one-dimensional. Meanwhile, Gangs of New York will suffer from the widespread publicity of its flaws, and The Pianist will suffer from a lack of marketing. The winner this year will be the energetic Chicago, which cleverly tells the story of two nightclub dreamers while intertwining the plot with enlivening musical performances. Should Win: The Pianist adds something to the mix we haven’t seen since Life is Beautiful. Understanding the motivation of director Roman Polanski makes the film special, as we see through the eyes of Wladyslaw Szpilman, who was gracefully playing Chopin on a Warsaw radio station when the first German bombs fell. We listen from his ears, we at least begin to understand his sorrow and the hardship he faced, and the true story element may still make this film a winner yet. Szpilman’s survival of the Holocaust is touching, and just as his anguished memories never went away, neither should the memory of this film. Best Actor Gonna Win: Adrien Brody (The Pianist) and Michael Caine (The Quiet American) give powerful performances in their respective films, but their subtle dispositions will not stand out as the best acting of the year. Nicholas Cage’s customary eccentric spirit, though impressive as he plays two roles in the film (conflict-ridden twin screenwriters), is not quite as powerful as Daniel Day Lewis (Gangs) or Jack Nicholson (Schmidt). Both of these actors undoubtedly carry their works, but Academy-favorite Nicholson is an almost sure lock on the award, and will win it. He plays a 66-year old man coming to terms with the reality of his own aging and of his own family problems, all the while trying to figure out the meaning of his life. The commanding performance is at times moving, at times amusing, but is at all times masterful. Should Win: Nicholson is not going to win just because he is truly loved by the Academy voters; he will win because he puts every aspect of himself into the role, much like in One Flew Over a Cuckoo’s Nest and As Good As it Gets, for which he also won. Best Actress Gonna Win: Renee Zellweger and Nicole Kidman find themselves competing for the second consecutive year, but neither name will be announced on Oscar night They each happened to be part of impressive ensemble casts, making it difficult for them to stand out. Meanwhile, the real race will be between Diane Lane (Unfaithful) and Julianne Moore (Far From Heaven), with Moore barely winning it. She plays a housewife in the 1950s whose seemingly perfect life spins wildly out of control, portraying the character with precision and the appropriate amount of passion for each situation. Should win: Julianne Moore stands out. Best Director Gonna Win: Martin Scorcese, making it the first time in four nominations. Peter Jackson and Rob Marshall directed films whose grandeur was displayed with special effects and stunning choreography. The precise and obsessive nature of Scorcese, combined with an acute sense of style and foresight, makes the war-ridden Gangs of New York refined. Should Win: Roman Polanski should win for the way he blends his direction with his main character’s point of view, and for the manner in which he allows us to begin to understand the terrors of the Holocaust, much like Benigni and Spielberg did in their famous films on the same topic. Best Supporting People Gonna Win: For the men, Chris Cooper will win the honor, as he is outstanding and charismatic playing fanatic John Laroche in the unconventional yet compelling Adaptation. For the women, the real race is between Meryl Streep and Kathy Bates. Though Streep has always been an Academy favorite, Kathy Bates’ role in About Schmidt was beyond impressive. Should Win: Christopher Walken as the poignant and conflicted father of conman Frank Abignale, Jr. in Catch Me If You Can and Kathy Bates for About Schmidt. — AK Best Picture Gonna Win- Chicago. It used to be that the light entertainment always lost out to the ‘serious message movie.’ For the past five years however, the opposite has been the case and no other movie has built up the buzz and the unanimous raves of the Kander & Ebb creation. The Hours had all the markings of Oscar bait, but tepid reviews have sucked all the momentum out of it. Gangs of New York is too bloody, too long and has been garnering mixed reviews (you either loved it or wanted the three hours of your life back). The Pianist is directed by Roman Polanksi. The Academy will never give an award to Polanski. Should Win: How, exactly, do you discuss the unspeakable? The Holocaust film has become a minor genre over the last 10 years. There’s almost a liturgy to the proceedings now: invasion, restrictions, the star, the ghetto, the atrocities, the train, the camp, the liberation. And that’s a lie. What Polanski knows is that every tale of survival is essentially a falsehood because for most people there was no salvation. So he made The Pianist, where there’s a scene when the main character is asked what he will do after the war. “Play the piano for polish radio,” he says. It’s black humor, to be sure, but no less absurd an answer than saying, ‘get married, go to America, believe in humanity, live with myself’ would have been. What, exactly could he have said that would not have been ridiculous? Polanski knows there’s no answer, which is why this is the best film of the year. Best Director Gonna Win: Martin Scorcese. This man should probably own about 4 of the little gold guys. He doesn’t have any. He’s getting old. Gangs had its problems to be sure, but it was the gutsy, great filmmaking of which Scorcese is the patron saint. Both he, and his closest competitor, Rob Marshall, are the kind of directors who legitimate auteur theory. They had the vision –literally. They saw how the idea could look, could work, on screen and made it happen. Almovar was included as a nod to his talent, overlooked by his own country, Polanski will never win, and Daldry doesn’t deserve to. Should Win: Actually, I can’t call this one. I think Scorcese was brilliant in everything he shot, I just wish he’d shot a bit less of it. Marshall was given the Herculean task of translating a musical to the screen and made a smoky, cheerfully cynical sing a long which pretty much rocked. Polanski was Polanski. Any of these guys get it, and justice is done. Best Actor Gonna Win: Jack Nicholson. Day-Lewis may yet pull off a groundswell, or he and Jack will split the vote enough for Adrien Brody to slip through. But Nicholson gave the kind of vulnerable performance people like to award. Also, if he wins, we get to see him raise those eyebrows. Should Win: Daniel Day-Lewis managed, with loud checkered pants, ur- NewYorkese and a killer’s slink, to single handedly keep an immense epic afloat. His Bill was mesmerizing. You couldn’t look away, not even when you wanted to, which, after all, was the point. Best Actress Gonna Win: This is the most fractured race, but Nicole Kidman dyed her hair, put on a fake nose, kissed a girl and offed herself. She was also pretty great while doing all of the above. That should be enough. Not enough people have seen Moore’s remarkable turn, Zellweger was the weakest link in her film, and Hayek and Lane haven’t even been mentioned in the same breath with the first three . Should Win: Jul
ianne Moore. Far From Heaven. Moore gave a performance at once bravura and naturalistic, taking her character and ripping off the lacquered finish to reveal a real person. Best Supporting People Gonna Win: Julianne Moore and Chris Cooper. Moore gets the consolation prize. Playing the embodiment of a life affirming force to a buttoned up member of the opposite sex is always good for a nomination. Do it as well as Cooper, and it’s good for a win. Chicago’s supporting cast (the best part of the movie) has been overshadowed by the push for Zellweger, and Bates’s skin has been mentioned more often than her performance. Meryl Streep is now in the unenviable position of being so good as to be taken for granted. Newman’s turn was riveting, it wasn’t the type of self-reflexive one the Academy awards older performers for. Ed Harris overacted his scenes and Reily didn’t have enough of his own. Then again, this category saw last year’s biggest upset. Should Win: Catherine Zeta Jones was the embodiment of the spirit of Chicago — sass and talent and viciousness all wrapped up in the kelig light allure of showbiz. Christopher Walken’s two-bit hustler of a father was alternately pathetic and charming. Just like a good con should be. — ES Archived article by Erica Stein
Editors' Note

By wpengine March 13, 2003

It hit 40 degrees yesterday. There’s a Dragon on the Arts Quad. People are about to board planes, taking them to places warm or foreign (unless you’re taking the bus back to Jersey. But that’s another story). All of this can only mean one thing: Spring is coming! This makes us very happy. How happy, you ask? We reviewed a children’s movie. That’s right. Turn to page 5 and you’ll find that we made Sue Karp suffer through The Jungle Book 2. How were we able to do this? What nefarious means did we employ to force our writer to sit through this drek? The answer is simple: we’re evil overlords, well maybe only one of us, the other is a caring and considerate … evil overlord! No, really. We’ve got overly complicated plans to take over the world focused on ‘lasers’ and everything. We use Disney films as torture because we can’t afford to rent a dungeon. And now a message from a newsman with no (public) voice, Managing Editor Mr. Marcus “Aurielias” Zawel: Yo, what’s up? I was bitching in the Sun offices last night about never having my very own “special space” to write cute little notes to my readers. So, here it is. And, damn it, I’m just too choked up for words. The only thing I keep thinking about is hurling large snowballs and watermelons at the Dragon (and architecture students) today. It’s going to be so much fun. And then, there are those “Dragon Patrol” guys who wear all that armor and riot gear. It’s so funny when you nail them. Oh, I’m not condoning hurting the architects. It’s just part of the tradition. And, I’m leaving for Jamaica on Saturday. Archived article by Erica Stein