The other day, Tiger Woods became the latest athlete to be asked about President Donald Trump, a man he has known for years. Of course Tiger was asked about Trump. Everyone talks about Trump. Why should Woods be excluded?

The questions were appropriate and reasonable. Trump called them part of “The Fake News Media,” so that confirms they were really good.

Tiger’s answers were harder to define. Basically, Woods said nothing. Words tumbled out of his mouth, but they were little more than pablum.

“We’ve played golf together … You have to respect the office … (I’m) really hungry.”

The quintessential Tiger Woods, ladies and gentlemen.

Tiger’s answers should surprise absolutely no one who has been paying attention to him for the past two decades. When it comes to controversial topics, Tiger’s default position is to say nothing of consequence. He’s been doing it for years.

It must be said that saying nothing has served Tiger very well, in a Jordanesque, “Republicans buy sneakers, too” kind of way. Even though the age of athletes passing the buck to make a buck has transitioned into an era of historic athlete activism, why would Tiger change now?

But I think even he has outdone himself this time. Of all the topics in the universe, there’s one on which everyone has an opinion: Donald Trump.

Everyone, apparently, except Tiger. Being able to successfully straddle the fence on Trump really is quite an achievement. It’s not exactly a 15th major, but it might be close.

Column: Tiger vs. Phil Mickelson on pay-per-view is more about greed than golf

More: Donald Trump appreciates Tiger Woods’ support: ‘He is very smart’

This is how it unfolded. On Sunday following his final round at The Northern Trust tournament in New Jersey, Woods first was asked about his relationship with Trump.

“Well, I’ve known Donald for a number of years,” he said. “We’ve played golf together. We’ve had dinner together. I’ve known him pre-presidency and obviously during his presidency.”

Then came a crucial question for the era in which we are living:

“At a time, especially 2018, I think a lot of people, especially people of color, immigrants, feel threatened by him, by his policies, he’s thrown himself into sports debates in terms of race with LeBron James, with the anthem — what do you say to people who might find it interesting that you, I guess, have a friendly relationship with him?”

LeBron might have talked for a half hour about that one. Serena Williams, too.

Tiger? Not a chance. This is the guy who once ducked talking about the ethics of playing in a South Carolina PGA event when the Confederate flag was still flying by saying he was going on vacation.

“He’s the president of the United States and you have to respect the office,” Tiger said. “No matter who’s in the office, you may like, dislike the personality or the politics, but we all must respect the office.”

And finally, one more:

“Do you have anything more broadly to say about the state and I guess the discourse of race relations?”

The answer you are about to hear is as vintage Tiger as there is.

“No. I just finished 72 holes and [I’m] really hungry.”

I’m now going to get into my time machine and travel to the year 2048. It’s a far more demographically diverse United States than 30 years earlier. The Parkland, Fla., kids and their peers are nearing 50. As they and their children study the history of this nation during the Trump years, their eyes grow wide when they realize that Tiger Woods — a man of color, obviously, and a truly historic cultural figure from the very end of the 20th century and the first part of the 21st century — answered a question about race relations by saying he was “really hungry.”

Tiger probably doesn’t care. History, however, most likely will.

 

 

Hodeidah, Yemen – Minutes. That’s all Muhammed Yassin had to save his family.

When two low-flying aircraft roared over his neighbourhood in the western city of Hodeidah last month, the 35-year-old knew time was ticking.

Like many Yemenis that day he rushed home, picked up his family, and hastily began packing essentials in order to leave.

More than 120,000 Yemenis had already fled the war-ravaged city since the start of June, most of them heading to the relative safety of the capital, Sanaa, about 170km away.

As laser-guided bombs were being prepared for release, Yassin and his family-of-four boarded a rickety old bus in which they spent the next few hours, peering out of the windows monitoring the skies.

It wasn’t long before the deafening sounds of warplanes fell silent, and the thick trails of white smoke from the multi-million dollar jets became small specks in the horizon.

“As we headed to Sanaa, I was looking forward to putting my family in the safe trust of the United Nations,” he told Al Jazeera.

But when they reached the capital, they were greeted by the sight of charred buildings, crumpled cars, and sewage in the streets – a city reeling from more than three years of air strikes by a Saudi-UAE military alliance.

I tell my children that things will be ok, but it’s hard to convince them when I struggle to even convince myself.

Samar Abdullah, a 38-year-old mother of four

‘Go hungry or go home’

Hundreds of Yemenis, most of them women and children, had been forced to take refuge in schools, he said.

The institutions had long-abandoned teaching and instead became makeshift shelters for the displaced, according to Yassin.

Children were found sleeping on the dusty floors of the Abu Bakr al-Siddiq school where his family, and dozens of others, had been housed.

According to several Yemenis who had also made the journey, costs had skyrocketed. The price of escorting a family to Sanaa had surged to 60,000 riyals ($240).

Once the internally displaced made it to the capital, rent and food cost a staggering 200,000 riyals ($800) a month.

With fruits, vegetables, and cooking gas in short supply, Yassin said the cost of living was just “too high”.

After all his savings dried up, he said he was presented with two options; either stay in the capital and go hungry, or return to Hodeidah and provide for his family.

“I had no option but to return home,” he told Al Jazeera.

“I am worried about facing death [in Hodeidah], but I am also worried about staying in a city without any source of income”.

Guerilla warfare

Once home to around 600,000 people, Hodeidah was a lifeline for millions of Yemenis before the war, and handled about 90 percent of the country imports.

Since it was captured by the Houthis during their 2014 lightening offensive, the Red Sea port city has seen its fortunes shift from Yemen’s agro-industrial capital, to a fierce battleground between the country’s warring factions.

According to aid groups, about 400,000 people still reside in the city, where Houthi fighters have started erecting barricades, digging trenches, and fortifying positions in preparation for guerrilla warfare.

“We have immediate concerns about the safety of people in the path of fighting,” said Suze van Meegen, a spokeswoman for the Norwegian Refugee Council in Hodeidah.

“We are concerned for children, the elderly and people with disabilities. We are concerned that the city could be closed off for a long period with nothing able to get in or out, and in that case, the biggest concern of all is the possible severing of supply lines into the rest of Yemen.

“That will push millions of people over the cliff of hunger into a full-blown famine.”

‘Can’t afford to leave’

With the Saudi-UAE alliance intensifying their bombing campaign on Houthis-held areas, several residents told Al Jazeera they had grown tired of trying to flee, only to find their next refuge becoming a target as well.

In June, the last month where statistics of air raids were available, the Saudi-UAE alliance carried out at least 258 air raids, nearly a third of which hit non-military sites.

The Yemen Data Project said at least 96 of those were carried out on Hodeidah.

“I can no longer afford to leave,” said Samar Abdullah, a 38-year-old mother of four.

“I tell my children that things will be ok, but it’s hard to convince them when I struggle to even convince myself.”

While some males such as Yassin had left with their wives and children, many said they returned home either to look after their property, find work to fight alongside the Houthis.

“I needed an income to support my family,” said Mahdi Ahmed, a 44-year-old supermarket worker who recently returned to the city.

Too poor to leave again, he says he expects the next few weeks to be “very difficult” unless the air strikes stop.

“I want to leave, but I’m prepared to live under bombardment,” he said.

As long as the Houthis control Hodeidah city, they have an advantage that can bolster their position in any future political process.

Khalil Dewan, a MENA analyst at IHS Markit

‘Graveyard’

The military offensive to take back Hodeidah is the most intense battle so far in a war that has killed more than 10,000 people.

Dubbed Operation Golden Victory, it is carried out by a disparate collective of 20,000 men.

The forces include the National Resistance, a group of fighters loyal to Yemen’s former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, the Tihama Resistance, a group of fighters loyal to Yemen’s exiled President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi, and the Giant Brigades, an elite unit backed by the UAE.

Despite each force pushing a different agenda, the National Resistance, led by the former president’s nephew Tariq Mohammed Saleh, has appeared to be the most effective of the fighting units.

Saleh, who analysts say is motivated by the killing of his uncle by the Houthis in December, has led his forces to within 2km of the rebel-held airport.

The offensive marks the first time since the start of the conflict that the alliance has tried to capture such a heavily defended city.

Analysts say the alliance is readying an attack on Hodeidah airport and a major highway linked to Sanaa.

“The Houthis have no plans to retreat,” said Khalil Dewan, a MENA analyst at IHS Markit.

“Their military wing [looks] set to fight the Saudi-UAE alliance to the end.

“As long as the Houthis control Hodeidah city, they have an advantage that can bolster their position in any future political process.”

‘Nowhere safe left to hide’

Should the alliance advance beyond the airport into the poor neighbourhoods of al-Rabsa and Ghalil, Houthi snipers and landmines will lie in wait, he added.

“The alliance absolutely wants to avoid street battles,” said Adam Baron, an analyst at the European Council on Foreign Relations.

“But it’s hard to see the Houthis – absent a diplomatic breakthrough – simply packing up their bags and moving on.”

Warning the human cost of retaking the city could be catastrophic, aid agencies have been trying to broker a deal saying the assault puts thousands of civilians “at grave risk” and could turn the city into a “graveyard“.

As the Saudis continue to bomb the city and drop leaflets calling for an insurrection, Yassin said the future looked bleak for the thousands of trapped civilians.

“There’s nowhere safe left to hide”.

Manal Qaed reported from Hodeidah. Faisal Edroos reported from Doha.

Denise Shannon has had quite a year since being named 2017 BBC Get Inspired Unsung Hero at the BBC Sports Personality of the Year show in Liverpool.

But it might have been a very different year – were it not for Graeme Chilvers.

He’s the man who nominated Denise in the first place.

“Denise had been on my radar,” says Graeme, who works as Health & Recreation manager for Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council in Leicestershire.

“We knew her since before 2012. We worked with her about carrying the Olympic torch. She really puts herself out. You can see the difference she makes.

“Everybody has something positive to say about her.”

The ‘lifeblood’ of sport

It was the variety of groups that Denise runs and helps with that impressed Graeme (and ultimately the judges) about her so much – something he’d had a hand in as well.

“I’m a ‘cascade trainer‘ for Walking for Health,” says Graeme, who has himself always been involved in sports coaching. “I trained Denise up to be a walk leader.”

And Graeme is passionate about the importance of sport and fitness for everyone.

“You see the impact, especially with young people and their education,” he says.

“Teachers say young people involved in sport have a better attitude to life. They focus more and work their way through problems and get success.”

There are 136 sports clubs that Graeme works with for the council, and he knows those would not run were it not for people like Denise.

“Volunteers are the heartbeat and lifeblood of sport in this country,” he adds. “It’s nice to highlight the difference they make.”

Graeme is also keen to emphasise the importance of younger volunteers as well.

“Young coaches are absolutely amazing,” he says. “We always look for, encourage and engage with young volunteers. There are lots of roles to do.”

Continuing to carry the message

It’s the ongoing nature of volunteering that is important for Graeme, and the impact being named BBC Get Inspired Unsung Hero can have.

“It never stops,” he said. “If it stops we would be doing something wrong.”

And winning the BBC Get Inspired Unsung Hero award can be the springboard to even bigger things.

“Our winners just don’t just win – they go on to do even more,” adds Graeme.

Sue & Jim Houghton, who won in 2012 (after being nominated by Graeme), helped to build the Sport in Desford leisure centre, which this year won the Disability Programme of the Year at the British Tennis Awards.

The impetus is something Denise already acknowledges.

“Winning the award has given me confidence in what I am doing and made me realise that I am making a real difference,” she says.

‘I’m just the storyteller’

As for his role in highlighting Denise and the others he has nominated in the past?

“It’s not me. I just tell the story,” adds Graeme. “We work closely with everyone, so we know their story. They’re the superstars – I’m just lucky to be the storyteller.”

So Graeme would urge you to nominate someone for the award.

“Sport in this country wouldn’t happen without these volunteers,” he says.

“It’s a fantastic way to acknowledge and thank them for the work they do.”

Find out how to nominate someone for the 2018 BBC Unsung Hero award here.

Image: JONATHAN NACKSTRAND/AFP/Getty Images

Just because you and your friends have moved to different corners of the globe doesn’t mean you have to stop watching shows and movies together.

Trying to all hit play at the same moment — as well as juggling between Netflix and Skype, a Facebook chat, Slack, Discord, or any other online chat program — isn’t exactly the most convenient thing in the world. Luckily, there is another way. 

There are several great apps, extensions and websites with the goal of syncing up Netflix streams across the Internet, but they all have their ups and downs. Some are exclusive to Chrome, some have top-notch chat features and some don’t go full screen.

Here are the pros and cons of the best ways to watch Netflix with your friends online.

1. Netflix Party

Netflix Party is a Google Chrome-exclusive extension that only requires one person to install it, making it the easiest of the three to set up. 

Once you install it, choose a movie or show, pause it, and then click the red “NP” button at the top right of your browser to get a link to a shared session. The extension allows you to chat with everyone in the viewing session, but doesn’t allow you to put in a name, so you’ll have to remember your friends’ random symbols.

Netflix Party allows for full-screen viewing and anybody in the session can hit pause, play or scrub through the timeline. The stream adjusts seamlessly.

The biggest downside to Netflix Party is that if you want to watch a few episodes of something or another movie, you’ll have to create a new session every time. Even if Netflix autoplays to the next episode, it will kick everyone out of the session and you’ll have to send out a new link to everyone.

2. Rabbit

Rabbit is one of the most well-rounded stream-sharing services available, partially because it can be used with any browser and partially because you can share all your favorite streaming services including Netflix, Hulu, Crackle and more.

Rabbit requires you to have an account and add the people you want to share a stream with as your friends. It works by having one person in control of the stream, which is shared via a proxy browser right on the Rabbit website. This means you’re essentially sharing the view of a full browser with everyone in your party, and you can go anywhere on the web that you like.

While this is a great feature, it doesn’t give the best stream quality. Even when watching something in a Rabbit room alone, the Netflix stream is pretty pixelated. It also cannot be put in full-screen mode or resized, relegating your viewing area to a small portion of your actual screen. If you’re watching on a laptop or tablet that’s 13 inches or less, good luck seeing much of what’s happening.

The chat options on Rabbit are great, though. The chat window on the right shows everyone’s username and picture, and you can even do voice and video chat.

These services have their upsides and downsides but they are the best Netflix-sharing services available, at least for now. Happy viewing with your friends. 

‘Crazy Rich Asians’ is a bona fide Hollywood smash. The movie tells the story of Rachel Chu, a native New Yorker who flies to Singapore to meet her boyfriend’s family. The film is being lauded by some as monumental moment for representation because it tackles the complexities of what it means to be Asian-American. Others, though, say it shines a spotlight on Asian-American representation while ignoring other Asian groups.

On this episode of The Stream, we speak with:

 

Brad Jenkins, @bradjenkins

Executive Producer, Funny or Die

 

Nancy Wang Yuen, @nancywyuen

Sociologist 

 

Kimberly Yam, @kimmythepooh 

Asian Voices Editor, HuffPost

Read more: 

Is ‘Crazy Rich Asians’ Asian enough? – The Washington Post 
‘Crazy Rich Asians’ is one of our saddest moments – Inkstone 
‘Crazy Rich Asians’ changes how Asian males are viewed – NPR 

What do you think? Record a video comment or leave your thoughts in the comments below. 

Three states held their primary elections Tuesday, cementing key match-ups for competitive races in November. 

The biggest surprise was Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum winning the Democratic nomination for governor of Florida. 

If Gillum, a Bernie Sanders-backed progressive, wins in November he’ll be the first African American to lead the state. Gillum will go head-to-head with hard-line conservative Rep. Ron DeSantis, who has the backing of the president and easily won his GOP nomination.

Meanwhile, Arizona’s Senate match-up will be two female House members both who have acted like centrists during their time in office. On the GOP side Rep. Martha McSally easily secured the nomination after a bitter primary and on the Democratic side Rep. Kyrsten Sinema rolled over her opponent.

So what else happened Tuesday night? Here are our key takeaways:

In Florida’s governor’s race each party picks their extremes

In Congress, DeSantis is a co-founder of the House Freedom Caucus, a group of far-right rebels who relish in taking on their party’s leadership. DeSantis and the roughly three dozen conservatives in the group have been known to sink – or at least threaten to – their own party’s legislation if they don’t believe it is conservative enough.

Some establishment Republicans had been hoping that Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam would be their nominee because they saw him as the stronger candidate in the general election. Florida went for President Trump by just one percentage point in 2016.

But nervous Republicans may be breathing a sigh of relief since Democrats chose progressive Gillum. Some establishment Democrats had thought that former Rep. Gwen Graham, a centrist, would have been a stronger competitor in a general election.

In an interview with CNN after his win, Gillum attempted to push back at being a far-left candidate by pointing out that despite the Sanders endorsement he had been a strong supporter of Hillary Clinton’s in 2016 said he would be governor “not just for some, but for all.” 

Trump is still kingmaker in primaries

In the Florida governor GOP primary, Trump endorsed DeSantis over the state’s more mainstream agriculture commissioner. Trump’s early endorsement of DeSantis proved to be helpful, DeSantis won easily Tuesday. The congressman ran hard on Trump’s endorsement. He even had ad where he was seen building a wall with his daughter and reading Trump’s book to his son.

“Such a fantastic win for Ron DeSantis and the people of the Great State of Florida. Ron will be a fantastic Governor. On to November!” the president tweeted Tuesday night. 

Trump had also endorsed current Florida Gov. Rick Scott for the GOP nomination for Senate. Scott did have a primary opponent, though it was not a serious challenge and he was always expected to win.

Meanwhile, in Arizona’s Republican Senate primary, no candidate got the official Trump blessing but all fought hard to tout their ties to the president.

McSally, the establishment pick, had once distanced herself from Trump as the congresswoman running for re-election in a purple congressional district. But in an attempt to make it through the GOP Senate primary, McSally cozied up to Trump with visits to the White House and support for some of his policies. Meanwhile, former state senator and physician Kelli Ward touted a tweet the president had fired off last summer saying it was “great” to see her running. And former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio boasted about his relationship with the president, who pardoned him for criminal contempt of court last August. 

In Oklahoma’s GOP primary runoff for governor – the state had its full primary earlier in the summer – former Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett and businessman Kevin Stitt both ran on support for Trump. Stitt won Tuesday.

A good night for House lawmakers

McSally, Sinema and DeSantis all made it through their primary for higher office this cycle. But they weren’t the only ones who made it out of primaries Tuesday night, there were no primary upsets and some House members who had faced tough primary challenges came out far ahead.

In Florida’s District 7, Democrat Rep. Stephanie Murphy easily beat a challenge from the left. Democratic Rep. Darren Soto in Florida’s 9th District got double the vote against former Rep. Alan Grayson who ran for his old seat.

In Florida 26th District, Rep. Carlos Curbelo breezed past his primary challenger. In District 18, GOP incumbent Rep. Brian Mast took down his two challengers who mounted bids after Mast called for a temporary moratorium on assault weapon sales.

Could turnout be a sign of things to come in November?

Voter turnout in Arizona was expected to shatter the previous record with early indications that more Democrats were a major factor. That would be good news for Democrats hoping to capture Sen. Jeff Flake’s now open seat in the fall. 

Meanwhile, Florida turnout did not appear to be record-setting, however it had been 16 years  since more voters had gone to the polls for a primary, according to data from the Florida Secretary of State’s office. This year, early results showed Republicans narrowly leading Democrats in turnout in the purple state. If Republicans are able to keep that trend, that could mean victory in two competitive statewide elections in the fall – the Florida governor’s race and the Senate race. Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson (who ran unopposed Tuesday) is officially running against Scott.

Arizona’s voting locations were a mess

Voters in Arizona’s largest county, Maricopa, ran into problems right away Tuesday with multiple reports of closed polling locations in the Valley, malfunctioning equipment and computers that weren’t set up.

To respond to the widespread issues county recorder and secretary of state asked to keep polling places open later than the 7 p.m. closing time. But the Board of Supervisors ultimately shot down the request. In a statement the board said keeping polls open could “confuse voters, delay returns, and have other unintended consequences.”

But polling places in parts of Maricopa County stayed open anyway – sort of. Because of a rule that says you can vote as long as you’re in line before 7 p.m. voters continued to stand in line, in some places well after the official close time.

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2BXcJzL

Puerto Rico was ravaged by Hurricane Maria one year ago next month. 

Since the island’s long recovery began, the government and independent institutions have worked to figure out exactly how many lives were taken by the effects of the extreme storm.

Today, we have a new, better estimate — and it’s more than 46 times the old one. 

According to a new study released by George Washington University (GW), 2,975 people died as a result of the hurricane. The government of Puerto Rico now accepts that number as an accurate death toll, updating their previous official estimate of 64.

The GW group teamed up with the University of Puerto Rico Graduate School of Public Health to analyze death certificates and other mortality data collected from September 2017 to February 2018. They found that the number of deaths during that time were uncharacteristically high, when compared to that same time period from other years. 

“The results of our epidemiological study suggest that, tragically, Hurricane Maria led to a large number of excess deaths throughout the island. Certain groups – those in lower income areas and the elderly – faced the highest risk,” lead investigator Carlos Santos-Burgoa said in statement on Tuesday.

In fact, the study found that in the poorest communities, the risk of dying increased 60 percent in the wake of Hurricane Maria. And the risk of dying increased 35 percent for older Puerto Rican males. 

This means that though the exact causes of death may be varied or unclear, in the six months after Hurricane Maria, more people died than usual. 

This kind of statistical analysis allows researchers to say that the hurricane left groups of people extremely vulnerable after the storm, even if the flooding rains and wind didn’t explicitly kill these individuals.

Researchers and journalists alike have long speculated that Puerto Rico’s official death toll of 64 was suspiciously low. 

Back in 2017, a New York Times investigation estimated that the death toll was around 1,052 — nearly 1,000 more than the original calculation. This led the governor of Puerto Rico, Ricardo Roselló, to commission an independent study looking into the death toll in February 2018. 

“It is of great interest to the State to identify how many lives were lost due to the passage of Maria through the Island,” Roselló said in a statement announcing the effort. 

“It is our interest that experts can identify as accurately as possible the deaths directly and indirectly associated with the hurricane to improve protocols for future natural disasters.”

In early July, researchers at Harvard released a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine which estimated that an excess of 4,500 people died in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria by surveying more than 3,000 houses. 

Then in late July, the Puerto Rican government quietly acknowledged that the death toll was likely much higher than 64, after releasing a 400-page document that put the toll at more than 1,400 people. The government waited for the GW study to officially update the death toll.  

The newest count puts Hurricane Maria in second place as the deadliest hurricane to ever hit the United States, behind the Great Galveston Hurricane of 1900 which reportedly took 6,000 lives or more. 

Aside from the official death toll, the study also provided recommendations to Puerto Rico’s local government and the U.S. federal government to better prepare for the next deadly storm. 

The study suggests a more efficient way to tally deaths after disasters, a fully staffed Department of Health, better intra-department communication, and other recommendations.  

“The lessons learned from this report and subsequent studies will help not just Puerto Rico, but other regions in the U.S. and around the world that face the ongoing threat of hurricanes and other natural disasters,” co-author Lynn R. Goldman said.

“If enacted, the recommendations of this report could help save lives in Puerto Rico and beyond.”

Conditions at the US Open were labelled “dangerous” as five men had to retire from their first-round matches on Tuesday because of heat-related issues.

Temperatures close to 38C (100F) in New York were made more stifling by levels of over 50% humidity.

French player Julien Benneteau, who won on day two, said matches in the middle of the day should not have been played.

“They were lucky they only had retirements,” said the world number 60.

The conditions led to tournament organisers implementing an extreme heat policy in men’s matches for the first time.

Wimbledon champion Novak Djokovic, who said he “struggled” with the heat in his win over Marton Fucsovics, added that the physical issues affecting some players were “really sad to see”.

Six players were forced to retire from matches on Tuesday, with the United States Tennis Association (USTA) saying five of the withdrawals – Italian qualifier Stefano Travaglia, Lithuanian Ricardas Berankis, Argentine Leonardo Mayer, Russia’s Mikhail Youzhny and Serb Filip Krajinovic – were “heat-related”.

The WTA has an extreme heat policy for the female players, unlike the men’s ATP, which has a discretionary rule.

USTA managing director Chris Widmaier said the decision to introduce it for the men was made after consulting its medical team.

The ruling offered a 10-minute break to both players after the third set and was taken if either or both wanted it.

The break took place in women’s matches between the second and third sets.

Former world number one Djokovic and his Hungarian opponent Fucsovics were the first players to use the rule after both suffered in the high temperatures.

“It wasn’t fun to play in the heat,” said Fucsovics, who lost in four sets.

“I was dying after each point. It was too hot for tennis. It’s dangerous.”

Djokovic, who asked for a sick bucket to be put next to his chair in the second set, said: “There’s so much cramping going on. You don’t want to see that.

“You have to be fit, of course. I agree with that. But there are some conditions that are so extreme that, as fit as you are, you can’t just not feel it.”

The USTA said it would make a decision on Wednesday, when conditions are forecast to be similar, whether to implement the heat rule for a second time.

“We will be doing this on a case by case basis,” Widmaier added.

He said the show-court Arthur Ashe and Louis Armstrong Stadiums do not have air conditioning when the roofs are closed, although they may be shut overnight in an attempt to try to cool the courts.

Bob Costas is in talks to leave NBC. Only the peacock has served NBC Sports longer.

Costas, his representatives and NBC have held discussions that could result in the longtime face of NBC Sports being let out of a contract that currently runs through 2021, a person with knowledge of the conversations told USA TODAY Sports. The person requested anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the discussions.

NBC declined to comment on Costas’ potential departure. Costas declined to comment on the specifics but offered some general comments in a pair of brief phone calls with USA TODAY Sports.

“There was a very long period of time when NBC’s programming suited my interests and abilities very well, from (late-night talk show) Later, to the news magazines, to baseball, the NBA and the Olympics,” Costas said. “And after deciding on my own to leave the Olympics after having done a dozen of them, you just look around and say, ‘What was once a perfect fit no longer fits that description.’ ”

Costas, 66, has worked at NBC since 1979 in starring roles as lead announcer on the Olympics, World Series and Super Bowls. More recently, he took on a sort of emeritus role at NBC Sports — of the sort that Tom Brokaw fills for NBC News — where he is on air mainly for major news events, such as the death of Muhammad Ali.

“It would be as if NBC suddenly lost the rights to hockey,” Costas said. “They wouldn’t think any less of Mike Emrick, and he wouldn’t think any less of them, but he’d have to go find a place to do what he does best.”

By that, Costas doesn’t mean baseball. He already broadcasts games for the MLB Network. The New York Post, which first reported the talks between Costas and NBC, reported that Costas wants to pursue a journalism show that includes news-making interviews and commentaries, some of which might extend beyond sports. That’s the sort of show that might appeal to pay networks such as HBO and Showtime, or streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon.

Costas declined comment on those possibilities, but he is known for outspoken commentary. He spoke at the University of Maryland in 2017 and said of football: “The reality is that this game destroys people’s brains.” The NFL is a business partner with NBC on Sunday Night Football, which has been the top-rated program in prime time for the last seven seasons.

Costas was at home Tuesday fighting a head cold. He cited “a great deal of mutual appreciation for everything that I was a part of at NBC for nearly 40 years.”

MORE: Bob Costas on the future of football: ‘This game destroys people’s brains’