Kentucky blew that game via CW  


A team that's behind has one commodity that should be valued above all else: the time left in the game.

If you are down, you need to extend the game. Every second counts. But teams never do this. Up until the very end, they'll continue to play normal defense and hope for a missed shot. I don't get it. Kentucky was down by two point with the shot clock turned off. I understand they were hoping that the ball would go to someone who is bad at shooting freethrows, but you have to do a cost benefit analysis. They let the clock run down to 10 seconds before they finally fouled the guy. And, it turned out to be the best free throw shooter on the team!

They got the ball back down 4, drove to the basket and scored with 7 seconds left. Imagine if it was 27 seconds left instead. Perhaps they could have gone back and forth until MS finally missed a free throw. But no, with 7 seconds, MS only had to make one more set of free throws to effectivly end the game.


And, can someone please explain to me the logic behind sitting a guy in foul trouble. "dang jethro, we better take this guy out of the game, b/c if he gets another foul, he's going to have to leave the game". "but wait, isn't it illogical to remove someone from a game b/c you don't want him to leave the game."

Apparently this guy on kentucky was pretty good. He got his 4th foul late in the 2nd half. they pulled him, just like CW tells you, and were hoping that the game would still be close when they brought him back in with 2:30 left. Now, riddle me this. If Kentucky lost by a basket, and this guy didn't foul out, wouldn't it stand to reason that they could have used this guy for at least one more possesion. Two? What if he played the whole 2nd half and never got that 5th foul.

They pulled this guy during the 2nd half, the beginning of OT, and the beginning of the 2nd OT. Maybe if he was in there, Kentucky could have ended it at any of those points.

If the guy fouls out, at least you know you played him as much as possible. When a guy ends the game with 4 fouls, any time he sat protecting against that 5th foul was wasted.

The Broken-Clock Syndrome  


"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

I apologize for the bait and switch, but this rant is not about sincere ignorance nor conscientious stupidity. While both are worthy of lengthy reflection, I want to discuss a third category…unfortunately, I don’t have a snappy catchphrase for it. Basically, it’s when someone believes in the right thing for the wrong reasons. Something about a broken clock or sun shining on a dog’s ass, perhaps?

Whatever the word is that I’m looking for, there is no better example of “it” than Howard Stern. Without getting into a political debate, Howard has pulled a complete 180 in politics (from evil and towards good), but has done so for the wrong reasons. His personal battles with the FCC have “changed” him. In other words, his extreme selfishness has led him to embrace an ideology based in having an objective, world view. A bit counter-intuitive, no?

So why should we care whether someone has a broken-clock ideology? On one hand, he’s spreading the correct message to a large audience that is now more likely to also embrace the belief. Taken to its logical conclusion, with more people believing the right thing, the world is a better place. However, there can be unforeseen consequences of the broken-clock syndrome. For instance, if someone points out that the clock is broken, then the message becomes dismissed as incorrect.

On an even more abstract level, what are we to think of Stern for just stumbling upon the correct answer? Is he commended for finally getting it right, scorned for still being driven by poor motives, or should we feel indifference? Because, truth be told, I don’t know how I feel, other than it is NOT indifference. I’m angered when I hear him talking about politics because I can see through him. I know why he believes what he believes, despite his claims. In essence, I can see that the clock is broken.

So where do we go from here? While “sincere ignorance” is in fact a dangerous evil, it’s not as all encompassing as I originally believed. Ignorance implies a lack of knowledge; to say Stern lacks knowledge is incorrect. Instead, it seems as though knowledge has no relevance in his decision. He comes to his conclusions first, and then stumbles into the knowledge after the fact.

I have no conclusion to this rant.

9:55 - I'm looking for something to watch at 10, and see chappelle's show is on. I think to myself: You know, I've seen so many of these repeats over and over again, but i've never seen the Rick James episode. This has to be statistically impossible. They must not show that episode for some reason. I mean, I've seen the skit with P-diddy and the Band about a dozen times already.

9:59 - Hmm, if i rant about this, a clever title could be "who's rick james"

10:00 - "this episode of chapelle is particularly offensive, viewer discretion is advised" me: oh man, it can't be, can it?

10:01 - time to think of a new topic for this rant.

I don't have enough energy to fully complain about Amazing Race, but, the extreme levels of luck involved in the show is mind boggling. I understand that luck plays a role in all reality shows (or in sports / playoffs, etc etc), but this is out of control. Would it kill the producers to make sure that all 8 of the rafts can actually work w/o breaking down and flooding. This is probably at least the 4th time that the form of transportation (whether it's raft, car, etc) has broken down and essentially eliminated a team. Stupid.

Jeter and Me  


My obsession with Derek Jeter has reached unhealthy levels; I'm sitting here at 10 AM on a Sunday, fuming over an article I just read. In it, Jeter calls the '98 team the best ever, and even though the current Yankees have more talent, they wouldn't be able to compete with that "team". Reading between the not so subtle lines, this is what i get: "Arod sucks".

Throughout his 10 year career, and particularly in the past year (since Arod has been in pinstripes), Jeter has been the Teflon don when it comes to ball players. He is revered by both the fans and the media and literally can do no wrong. Excuses are made ("where is the PROOF that jeter refused to move from SS when they got arod?"), feats exaggerated, and shortcomings are ignored. Two questions remain: 1) What is going on here? and 2) why does it make me so angry?

1) I have no idea what's going on, but here are some factors that might be contributing.

When the Yankees first started winning championships in the late 90's, it had followed a long draught of mediocrity. Thus, the "evil empire" stigma had not yet been attached (or, more accurately, had been forgotten since their last dynasty). The Yankees finally winning after all those years was the feel good story of the year, and leading the way was the rookie, Derek Jeter.

Why Jeter and not the other home grown stars like Bernie, Posada, or Mo? Mo's ears, Posada's chin, and Bernie's challenges with the english language are my cynical answer to that. Jeter's multi-racial, but he's still not as ethnic as the other three. And his pretty boy good looks and winning smile made him a media darling. If you see a 14 year old girl at yankee stadium, there's a good chance she's got a #2 painted on her face.

Jeter had a monster 1999 and has been living off that reputation ever since. The fact of the matter is that he's a very good, but not great, offensive player. Defensively, he's just horrid. But his combination of poor range and strong arm makes him look better than he is. It's a rare talent (or lack there of), to make the routine play look memorable, but anyone who has seen Jeter's patented pivot-jump throw from deep in hole knows what i'm talking about.

Jeter is the personification of the "classy" Yankees. It's said that the current Yankees have the talent, but not the professionalism of the late 90's Yankees. Once again, this is a case of the tail wagging the dog. Let's take a look at some of the personalities on those yankee teams.

1) wade boggs - wife beater
2) david cone - remember his days with the mets and the accusations that came from the bulpen at shea?
3) cecil fielder - currently bankrupt from his huge gambling problem.
4) Darryl strawberry - yikes
5) Gooden - not sure if he was on the championship rosters, but he was part of the upswing of the Yankees
6) Roger Clemens - headhunter
7) Ruben Sierra - "lockeroom cancer"
8) Jeff Nelson - Redneck
9) Don Zimmer - A long history of inappropriate behavior (that's ignored b/c he's a lovable old white guy)
10) David Wells - A big fat drunk (but lovable b/c he's white)
11) Paul O'neil - A guy notorious for losing his temper and breaking stuff (but b/c he "cares so much"...i.e. he's white).

9, 10, and 11 are who really bother me. If David Wells was black and wore a lot of chains and was known for partying all the time, he would have been hated. But b/c he's the image of the white blue collar worker (facial hair, beer belly, hearty laugh) he's beloved.

Paul O'neil is the Rasheed Wallace w/o the tattoos, dreads, or dark skin pigmentation. That's a slight exaggeration as I'll admit that Paul's rage was more self-directed while Wallace would take it out on refs and even teamates, but they were both driven to succeed.

I'm going to cut this rant off for now, b/c this tangent is spiraling out of control. This was supposed to be about Jeter, but is turning into a rant on the myth of the late 90's Yankees. I will end though on the note that all the players i mentioned above, in addition to guys like knobloch, jimmy keys, tino martinez, etc etc, were NOT from the Yankees farm system. So, to claim that the Yankees NOW just buy their players is very very laughable.

First team eliminated!  


like a classic novel, The Inferno is something that you have to see more than once to catch all the subtleties. Tonya was complaining that her team told her she wasn't going to win in this competition. She was upset by this b/c she lives in a fantasy world where she doesn't understand her limitations, or physics, or anything.

It was supersweet to see that she was in fact the first group eliminated in teh competition. Snap.

Decisions vs. Results  


I think it’s funny that the people who most talk about luck and chance are the ones who least understand probability. And by funny, I mean tragically ironic and sad. I’m convinced that the majority can not wrap their tiny little minds around the concept of Expected Value. And because of that, they can’t separate the decision from the actual outcome.

The actual outcome of the cause-effect chain is completely irrelevant. Whenever a decision is made, there are an infinite amount of variables that are out of the person’s control. First and foremost on that list is random chance. You can never remove random chance from the equation. Thus, looking at the results instead of the decision is an exercise in futility.

The best decision is based on the accumulation of all of the obtainable knowledge and determining which one has the highest expected value. In the long run, this will net you the highest results. It boggles the mind, and pains the soul, to listen to people speak and realize they can’t understand expected values. People staying in on the off-chance that they’ll catch the flush when they only have 3 diamonds after the flop. “hey, you never know”. Fine, of course you don’t know. But more times than not, it’s not going to be worth the money you spent to find out.

This all ties in together when people will look at a result that was unexpected, and then rewrite their opinions regarding the original decision. “that was a smart decision, just look at how it turned out.” Stop talking. That was not a smart decision, he just got lucky.

Too often in our society, the outcomes overshadow the decision making. And by too often, I mean always, 100% of the time, w/o fail. Nobody is objective enough to understand the ramifications of chance. People can’t understand that a good decision can have a bad outcome. The next sportscaster who says “we’ll have to wait and see to determine if that trade was a good decision” is going to….well, nothing is going to happen, but I’ll get re-angry. A good trade can wind up having disasterous results. And a bad GM could get lucky in a trade. Only after looking at a large collection of trades can one determine whether, on average, the GM is making good moves. Because, in the long run, having a higher expected value will always (eventually) lead to positive results.

5 minutes  


the first 5 minutes* of the 10'oclock news on fox 5 last night was about a dog that was running around on the highway. the news is 60 minutes less commercials (which is what around 20?). This is a network channel. from new york, the biggest city in the world. 1/8 to 1/12 of the news for ny city (and to a lesser extent, planet earth) was about a dog running around, according to the people of fox.

what, me worry?

* I'm assuming the news started right at 10. about 2 minutes into this leading story, i was so stunned that i looked at the clock. it said 10:02. I wasn't even half way into the segment.

just a reminder, his site is here

The method through which your company uses its towers is also paramount. Some companies have a "getting connection is more important" mentality vs a "staying connected is more important". The difference is... In the first instance, if you call in first to a tower at rush hour, and there is a big backup, and everyone starts hopping on the phone. As soon as that capacity is full, the next call will most likely kick you off the network, and you would have to call back...effectively knocking somone else off. They prioritize a NEW CALL as more important, and view a network busy signal as a bad thing. Conversely, the second company will tend to keep your call, but you will get more network busy signals... try calling from a sports game at halftime... And in most markets a 911 call will out prioritize either one, and bounce callers either way. So... with that in mind.... most companies worth their salt will offer reimbursement or credits for DROPPED CALLS. Its a pain, but the companies are able to see how many dropped calls you have. Also keep in mind, if you dont know, most companies offer phone software upgrades that can either be programmed over the air, or you take them into the store, and they upgrade things such as the tower locations, or your preferred roaming lists... and can increase the performance of your phones, especially if you have had them 9 months or more.

Jason and Me  


This very good article on Jason Giambi accurately describes the situation as not black or white, but rather a mixed shade of gray. Yes, he "cheated", but his over vilianization is out of control. In the article, there's a paragraph blasting the yankees for being against Giambi only b/c he had a poor season. That, if he had a Sheff like season last year, he would be embraced. And, if he regains some level of sucess, George will "forgive" him.

so what? I have no problem with the Yankees being selfish. If the yankees could, in theory, get out of contracts if those players used steroids, OF COURSE, they'd try to get out of Giambi's, but not Sheff's. The yankees have to be concerned with putting the best team out there (which leads to making the biggest profit). They aren't there to make friends. I fully believe a team should "use" their players just like players should "use" teams.

I don't believe in the hometown discount just like i don't believe that players (like Biggio) are "owed" something. You sign a contract, and you live out the terms of that contract. If you wind up overachieving, you don't hold out for more money. And if you tank, the team can't ask you to pay them back. End of story.

As great a movie as Roger and Me is, it's based on a faulty premise. General Motors never owed Flint Michigan anything. General Motors has the right to hire whoever they want for their company. It's unfortunate that there is cheap human labor in countries such as mexico and even more unfortunate that our country allows companies to exploit this labor. And while there is a moral question as to whether GM is "wrong" for using this labor, the brunt of the responsibility falls on the government. If the ONLY goal of a corporation is to maximize profits, then how can you really fault a company for doing this in a LEGAL way.

The documentary does a great job at making GM out to be bad guys. That they abandoned the town and put an entire city out of work.

But, would an indivual employee, who left GM for (uh, is Ford a different company?) Ford be considered a deserter? Does he "lack loyality" for taking a new job that pays more and gives better benefits? Why is it ok for the worker to break the agreement, but not the company?

And yes, i see the logical answer of "gm won't be crippled if/when an employee leaves, they'll just hire someone else". But this isn't enough for me. If the only difference is the severity of the consequences, then the CAUSE shouldn't be judged any more or less harshly.

I need to think about this more.

Bob's Furniture  


A commercial caught my eye today. it seemed local, but i don't think Direct TV has local commercials. So, my only conclusion is that it's cheap. Anyway, it's for bob's furniture and bob and his wife are talking about their mattresses that they sell. Bob did most of the talking, but i noticed that the wife had a lot of facial expressions. It was almost as though she couldn't just stand still and HAD to be doing something at all times. I thought it was pretty humerous. In that i could see right through her.

Then, about 30 minutes later, she had a commercial by herself. the hand gestures were out of control. Like a deaf italian guy. She actually acted out "hand wood carved".

That made my day. So sad.

in a thread where someone mentioned my post was primey worthy....  


someone had to go and steal my thunder. this post is awesome

if i had to choose one man to pitch a game to save michael kay's life, i would take lt. daniel kaffee every day of the week and twice on sunday.

Michael Kay: You want answers?

Lt. Kaffee: I think I'm entitled to them.

Michael Kay: You want answers?

Lt. Kaffee: I want the truth!

Michael Kay: You can't handle the truth!

Son, we live in a world that has rings. And those rings have to be won by men with heart. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Szymborski? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Athletics and you curse the Yankees. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Billy Beane's shît not working in the playoffs probably saved the game. And my writing and playcalling, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves this game...

You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about on nerd forums, you want me on the radio. You need me on the radio.

We use words like intangibles, mystique, aura...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent winning something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the pennants of the glorious franchise I promote, then questions the manner in which I promote it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a bat and play the game. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

Lt. Kaffee: Are you a snivelling Yankee homer?

Michael Kay: I did the job they pay me to do.

Lt. Kaffee: Are you a snivelling Yankee homer?

Michael Kay: You're goddamn right I am!!



That's all amazing race is. I wasn't really watching this week, but i don't think i needed to. a bunch of people are running around in a big rush. i get it. They are taking this "race" term a little too litterally. You can have a race where you aren't sprinting the whole time. It's called a marathon. I would much rather watch a show where the teams have to plot out a strategy and then impliment it. That would be compelling television. This is not. Probably won't be watching the rest of the season. or at the very least, i'm not going to make an "effort" to watch it.

All Kinds of Awesome  


The big labowski was almost as good as steve claimed. which is saying something. I already have a desire to watch it again. and, if anyone can watch it and not crave a white russian, they are stronger than me.

also, the correct answer is "steve bushemi's character is the best".

as a sidenote, someone who's movie opinion i respect was outraged that i liked i heart huckabees. He likened it to a bunch of college kids who just walked out of a philosophy 101 course and wax poetic about real issues.

I can see where he's getting that from, but i don't think huckabees was taking themselves that seriously. i think it was all done tongue in cheek. of course, i saw it with ross and when i told him i liked it he said "really? i didn't think you'd allow yourself to address those type of issues", so maybe it WAS meant to be serious. or, ross is just nuts :)

i heard advertisements for this blind justice show over and over again on stern. and unlike stubhub, i was NOT hooked. every cliche was thrown out there: "in the blink of an eye, his life changed", his partner doesn't trust him, he develops a super sense of smell b/c he's been blind for a few months, etc etc.

are you the blind detective? "no, i'm a homicide detective who happens to be blind".

how long do they expect to be able to roll out episodes for this? how many cases are going to turn on his super ability to smell? This isn't the little guy trying to make good. He's not fighting unfair stereotypes. he's BLIND. blind people can not be homicide detectives. they can't be cops. end of story.

this is worse than the thundercat who was blind, but didn't act it b/c he used his hearing (and taste?) to walk about like he wasn't blind.

I'm going to pitch a show where i play center field for the Yankees. It's about as realistic as this garbage.

if you are going to be an idiot, at least get the quote right  


" In the stands, someone held a sign that read: "Jason Do You Have Milk." The word "Milk" was crossed out and followed by "Juice?" "

It's on  


kill bill II
Originally uploaded by kronicfatigue.
First, the owner of Mexicali Rose dismisses my scathing review b/c i'm a lawyer (or possibly a competitor in the area?) and laughes off my complaints. He even goes as far as saying i'm a liar and that the chips weren't 7 dollars.

Now, my post (along with a post that was thanking me for my post) has been deleted.

Does this guy know who he's dealing with? I have no other reason to get up in the morning, except to take this guy down. He will be destroyed.

Fox has sunk to a new low  


Just when you think fox can't get any worse, i see this lead in for their 10 pm news:

"this hot teacher had sex with one of her students. now we have tape of the phone calls she made to him. tune in at 10."

Hmm, i wonder if they are airing this segment b/c it's newsworthy and to enlighten on the situation, or if they like the sensationalism aspect of it. I mean, seriously, who cares if she's "hot".

"a woman was raped in central park last night, tune in at 11 to see his rippling muscles and rugged good looks."