yet another sports roundup

the hawks-preds series was pretty entertaining, especially the first quarter of last night's game.  but i was especially impressed by the penalty kills in the third quarter, including the work of brent "modeling career on hold" sopel:

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/blackhawks/post/_/id/4662876/sopel-penalty-kill-gave-their-all

EDIT:  another great article on sopel -- basically there's an art to blocking shots, at least without losing your eyes:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/hockey/blackhawks/ct-spt-0429-blackhawks-chicago--20100428,0,7237473.story

and you cannot argue with seabrook's response to a determined heckler -- he waited until no one was looking and just nailed him!  he must have practiced that to have that kind of aim.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l89Eg9baYOA

on a considerably heavier note, i hope people that the rothlisberger rape saga is ongoing.  yes, i know the criminal case has been dismissed, but creepy stuff continues to turn up:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/04/ga-cop-who-took-statement-from-ben-roethlisberger-resigns/1?csp=outbrain&csp=obnetwork

finally, from kath, i believe courtesy of bill simmons:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb2UME1fBYo

i don't speak serbian, but the international language of shock and disappointment is pretty clear.

not a climber

check out the slideshow attached to this article:

http://www.slate.com/id/2250625

i almost barfed just looking at the pictures.

cheers for that guy

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/04/meteorite-donated-to-field-museum.html

Because the meteorite hasn't been sitting around collecting contaminates for months - and the folks handling it now are using gloves to further protect it - researchers at the museum's Pritzker Center for Meteoritics and Polar Studies have a rare opportunity to conduct radiation tests not possible on other meteorites.  

"It's absolutely amazing," Grande said.

That's what Boudreaux was hoping for.

"Any time I get the chance to get something really amazing, I want them to have it," Boudreaux said.

i'm super impressed that this guy combed the countryside and then immediately donated the meteorite from that recent meteor shower to the chicago field museum. i feel like you don't read about that kind of public spirited-ness very often. 


on an unrelated note, do you think the white sox and cubs decided ahead of time on home vs. away jerseys for the hawks game?  

http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/about-last-night/2010/04/sighting-vince-vaughn-sox-cubs-at-blackhawks-games.html

damn the male metabolism

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/magazine/18exercise-t.html?pagewanted=all:  

In practical terms, the results are scientific proof that life is unfair. Female bodies, inspired almost certainly “by a biological need to maintain energy stores for reproduction,” Braun says, fight hard to hold on to every ounce of fat. Exercise for many women (and for some men) increases the desire to eat.

i love it when scientists confirm something i've always suspected, even when it's a bit of downer.  in better news, the overall crux of the article is that while you can't lose much weight with just exercise, you can protect weight loss from dieting through regular activity.  

sports round-up

paganello results (near miss for jessi and me):  http://www2.paganello.com/risultati2010/lev4b.asp?codTorneo=3

average dude vs. pro, a.k.a. me vs. hellyer: http://kottke.org/10/04/average-dude-vs-pro

last but not least, i wonder what the ultimate equivalent of this is, perhaps a flat chest?  discuss:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/browbeat/archive/2010/04/08/what-can-you-learn-from-staring-at-a-baseball-player-s-butt.aspx

a passover miracle

in honor of the holiday, a small selection of passover articles:

http://www.slate.com/id/2248901/ ("Scientific explanations for the miracles of Passover")

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/us/politics/28seder.html ("Next Year in the White House: A Seder Tradition")
and, http://www.slate.com/id/2248903/ ("Get through the Haggadah in two minutes flat"), with my favorite part being the comment suggesting an  "even more abridged version, which some would argue applies to pretty much every Jewish holiday:  Once upon a time, the goyim tried to destroy us, they failed. Let's eat."

and as a follow up to last week's post:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/opinion/28rich.html ("The Rage Is Not About Health Care")

really, really, ridiculously good looking

Reading "Above the Law" earlier today, came upon a post entitled "Attractive People May or May Not Be Better Lawyers, But They Do Get Paid More."

This initially got me excited as, "Well I guess it all started the first time I went through the second grade. I caught my reflection in a spoon while I was eating my cereal, and I remember thinking 'wow, you're ridiculously good looking, maybe you could do that for a career.' ... Be professionally good looking."

However, the news for really, really, ridiculously good looking ladies like me, is not all good.   In fact:

"[S]tudies of attractiveness and earnings" showed that " for women, being very attractive means they are less likely to make partner. The data on this was bell shaped. The least attractive and most attractive women were least likely to make partner. This was not the case for men. The more attractive guys are, the more likely they are to make partner."

The study author posits that this is the case because "the very good-looking women are probably getting married.”  Of course there's no reason why married women can't be partners, so I'm assuming he means "getting married, having kids, and being deemed the primary caregiver for those kids," or "getting married and assuming the position of non-working trophy wife."  Actually that second one sounds great...    

politix

by way of disclaimer, i'm about as politically illiterate regarding american politics as an otherwise well-educated person can be (especially one that has undergraduate degrees in political science and international relations). the reason? irrationality drives me nuts, and that's exactly how i view about 90% of politics (irrational arguments to irrational people).

nonetheless, in light of a rather epic development (i.e. health care), i'm trying to force myself to read up a bit. a few articles that i enjoyed more than not:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/opinion/23herbert.html (ranting on some of the same things i find disgusting about american politics, albiet laying most of it at the door of the GOP)
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/03/the_costs_and_benefits_of_the.html (discussing the political costs and benefits/game theory of opposing the health care bill)
http://www.slate.com/id/2248566/ (an optimistic caution against "shorting" Obama)

and a couple basic FAQs those other political illiterates out there:
http://www.slate.com/id/2248560/
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/your-money/health-insurance/22consumer.html

lyrics i love

ok, i'm a sucker for good lyrics or even just a good line.  not to the extent that the musical aspects of the song are irrelevant (on the contrary, i love a good beat, lyrics aside), and i'm not even talking about lyrics that would make a good poem standing alone, but basically the ones that for some reason stick in my head.  probably my favorite lyrics are radiohead's talk show host (let's not engage in a detailed psychological analysis of that... or maybe let's???), but i'm going to keep posting other ones that catch my ears below.

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/notoriousbig/hypnotize.html  (excellent self praise: "hah, sicker than your average")
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/kanyewest/throughthewire.html (on having a jaw wired shut: "I drink a boost for breakfast, and ensure for desert.  Somebody ordered pancakes I just sip the sizzurp.")
http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Scenario-lyrics-A-Tribe-Called-Quest/382A5195284EEA5D48256893002D3BFE (more excellent self-praise and solid smack talk, including our college cheer "don't violate or you get violated")
http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/pepper-lyrics-butthole-surfers/1b93e4b36cc553b348256d0a00310b24 ("Some will fall in love with life And drink it from a fountain That is pouring like an avalanche Coming down the mountain")

in the meantime, share your own in the comments?

time suck

i'm sure many of these links have been around for months, but they were all brought to my attention this week.  i had an incredibly busy week at work and it's really amazing i got any work done at all in light of all this outstanding fluff:

muzak:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NGSl3CldFY (TROLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qybUFnY7Y8w (this too shall pass v.1)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJKythlXAIY (this too shall pass v.2)

puppies:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUCRZzhbHH0 (slo mo puppies)

http://hipsterpuppies.tumblr.com/ (ironic puppies)

http://www.raincitystory.com/flash/screenclean.swf (slurpy puppies)

and finally:

http://awkwardfamilyphotos.com/  (can't sum it up any better than that)

well this is depressing

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/in-obesity-epidemic-whats-one-cookie/

so this article takes the position that good but small changes in diet and exercise (like those heralded by Michelle Obama and just about everyone else) don't equal long term weight loss because your body adapts:

A person’s weight remains stable as long as the number of calories consumed doesn’t exceed the amount of calories the body spends, both on exercise and to maintain basic body functions. As the balance between calories going in and calories going out changes, we gain or lose weight.

But bodies don’t gain or lose weight indefinitely. Eventually, a cascade of biological changes kicks in to help the body maintain a new weight. As the JAMA article explains, a person who eats an extra cookie a day will gain some weight, but over time, an increasing proportion of the cookie’s calories also goes to taking care of the extra body weight. Eventually, the body adjusts and stops gaining weight, even if the person continues to eat the cookie.

well, hell.

the oldies and the goodies

this topic comes courtesy of mer and neva, who both forwarded/posted this link:

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2010/02/16/the-case-for-an-older-woman/

neva, taking the glass half-full approach, refers to it as "OK cupid's (statistically-based) argument for older women." of course another way to look at it is "OK cupid's collection of statistics showing that guys are predisposed against older women."

that said, i enjoyed reading it in combination with OK cupid's earlier post:

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2010/01/20/the-4-big-myths-of-profile-pictures/

then scan down to the section entitled "the cleavage shot," which states:

Like the Ab Shot, the Cleavage Shot is very successful, drawing 12.9 new contacts per month, or 49% more than average. But unlike the Abs Shot, this positive effect actually trends against the effects of age.

As you would expect, women get fewer and fewer new messages as they age (which is a topic for another whole post!), but this decrease in new contacts is substantially slower for women with cleavage pics. A 32 year-old woman showing her body gets only 1 less message a month than the equivalent 18 year-old; an older woman not showing off gets 4 messages less, a large relative fall-off in popularity.

so, i have two takeaways from this combined info. one, if i ever resurrect my OK cupid profile, the girls should be on display to counterbalance my "aging." second, and more generally, i should invest in some more revealing clothes!

back to reality

got back from kaimana yesterday, to snow and cold and apparently my gangster neighborhood:

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/02/north-clybourn-shooting-near-north-side-st-elizabeth-hospital.html

seriously, that's like right in front of piece!

superbowl round-up

i missed most of the superbowl, so i did some catching up today. some articles i liked in in two categories:

(1) the football (specifically, great color on the onside kick):  http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/02/08/mmqb.superbowl/index.html?xid=cnnbin&hpt=Sbin ("So I just figured I better hang onto it for dear life," he said. "The Colts were punching at it and grabbing for it, trying to get it out. But I didn't care if they broke all my fingers. There was absolutely no way in the world I was going to let go of that ball. That was our ball.")

(2) the ads:
  http://www.slate.com/id/2243904/pagenum/all/ ("Ad Report Card has long considered the melding of practical sales pitch with uplifting emotion the holy grail of advertising, and here's a prime example. Frankly, I'm getting a little of sick of Google doing everything right.")

red is still bad

a follow up on status of a few months ago:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_04/013447.php (the supposed "west coast surplus of men")

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/fashion/07campus.html?ref=fashion&pagewanted=all (the supposed dearth of men on college campuses)

oh, the irony

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/thoughtful_nation_questioning ("After much thought, I am left with the question: What if both teams are succeeding by striving? And what if both teams actually have conflicting concepts of what constitutes their opposition—not a mere football team, but an adversary physical, metaphysical, or perhaps even emotional? If we agree that this is the case, then each team may have its own unique definition of success independent of the other, a definition rendering any so-called 'final' score moot.")

http://www.upa.org/ultimate/sotg/sotg.shtml ("And in the midst of the war, knowing only one of you can win, you play against your opponent the way you wish they'd play against you: with everything you've got left, respecting their efforts and their calls, because you know that no matter how bad they want to win, they're going to do it fairly. And when it's all over, when no matter what the outcome, you shake hands, look your opponent in the eye with a stare of mutual respect and say 'nice D', that's Spirit of the Game.")

it's funny because it's true

http://www.collegehumor.com/article:1800501 (will ring true with all the boarders AND skiers out there)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DYje57V_BY (can anyone say it any better than homer?)

tell me how you really feel

earlier today slate posted an article about the proposed change in tax brackets and how people making $250k obviously ARE rich but don't FEEL rich:

http://www.slate.com/id/2243529/

at the time i read it, the topmost comment was by "amy" who had this to say:

People who are in the" rich man" tax brackets but complain the loudest about feeling poor are all those saps who have children. I understand, Moms and Dads feel compelled to provide the best care and schooling and violin lessons and $18 an hour nannies so that at the end of the month there is nothing left for living, parents stare into skinny checkbooks, fret about the price of organic foods, wonder how they will ever retire at 55! Blah blah.

Based on what I am reading in this comment section the biggest mistake a person can make is having children - if the goal of a person is to feel financially secure now and into the future. Also, much to my surprise, research has repeatedly shown that people with children are not happier or more fulfilled than those of us who chose to remain spawn free. So perhaps the baby mistake was absolute.

Who cares if abstract construct like "society" or I have read "the species" fall away after we have gone? Why should I suffer in my short life for some abstract concept like "society"? Japan has a negative birthrate, and their society is intact. Don't worry, dumb f*ckers will have kids, and those kids might not be stupid. It happens, I have seen it - smart kids from stone stupid parents. Society will move on without $250k'ers having kids.

If you want kids, have them. I don't begrudge any parent the government baby deduction and I wouldn't mind if society used less money "fighting terror" or whatever, and instead funneled more tax dollars to fund better services for families (not like outrageous shit like, $18 nannies and violin lessons though). But please, oh please, don't complain once you have the kids. I had so many vibrant exciting intellectual friends once, now they all have kids and are perfectly dull.

i've definitely heard this sentiment before, but never quite as stridently. it's quite a spectacular rant, even if you think she's a "dumb f*cker" with a "stone stupid" point of view.

slimmer better faster stronger?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/fashion/04best.html?hpw=&pagewanted=all

this article is super relevant to two experiences i've had in fitness training over the last couple years.

first, i'm well aware of the correlation between losing weight and gaining speed. hellyer even described it once as the difference between just running and running with a weight vest. according to this article, there's a point in which the trade-off doesn't work any more. that seems like a great point to generally work towards, without being too maniacal about it.

second, a gym (xsport) recently made me go through a rather elaborate fitness test in order to try the gym for a month free. the test is definitely slanted towards making you feel like a giant fat-ass so you sign up on the spot for a personal trainer. however, my results didn't fit that story as well as they'd like. basically, they started off by informing me that according to my height and weight i had to lose 22 lbs of fat to basically be in average shape. however, that theory broke down when they took my VO2max, which was apparently in "marathon runner range" (i wish they'd given me the exact number so i could know if that had any truth to it). basically, i take both figures with a huge grain of salt, but it was interesting to see one theory derailed by the other. again, i'm sure my VO2max would improve with some additional weight loss, but certainly 22 lbs of fat is not in the cards.

it goes both ways

being overeducated holds you back in love? well love hurts too.

http://www.slate.com/id/2243179/ ("lady lawyers" = spinsters?)

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100129&sportCat=nfl (hilariously tragic emails from vikings fans)