If i were to write a poker book

I had some free time on my hand last friday… just like most fridays.. or really just like most days in general, so i decided to hit up hollywood casino in grantville and let fate decide how much money my one friend was going to get in his wedding congratulations card the following day.  As i was sitting quietly at the 1 / 2 no limit hold’em table, i started to think about how i had recently tried to humble brag to someone about my short lived career as a poker writer.

The site i wrote for is long forgotten and the articles have disappeared into the either. Maybe if i look jard enough i could find a copy of some articles on an old PC of mine. It probably is not worth the effort. I did thoroughly enjoy the writing which mostly focused on player bios and a few strategy articles thrown in here and there.

At the time i was doing all this poker writing i thought about doing a book, but there wasnt really much point. The market was saturated and i dont think i would have had anything unique or refreshing to share for any potentail readers.

All of these memories of past articles, forum discussions, and poker books, got me into a reflective mood of my own personal strategy for texas holdem cash games. In particular low stakes no limit holdem.

Would it be worth it to invest the time right now and write something like that? Not really. I would enjoy it but i already have five other things i promised myself i would write that are piling up.

Still as i sat there, slowly building my stack to a $56.00 profit ( ka ching!!!) I started to organize my playing strategy into chapters for the make believe book i will never write.  Obviously it would be hella lame to just be a straight up strategy book, but it also couldnt be a personal story like the fantastic “positevly fifth street”. Instead it would be a combination of different genres. Some stories, some humor, some opinions, all intercut throught a progressive series of strategy chapters.

Here is how i think i would organize things:

Chpt. 1 introduction to why you should or shouldnt read the book and the format of the book. Big emphasis on realistic expectations. Admit that most of the strategy in the book isnt that original.

Chpt. 2 quick recap of
how to play holdem with a note to skip it if u already know how.

Chpt 3. Some hard fast rules that are almost always applicable. Such as “always have a reason for every action make at the table. If you call a bet, there better be a reason why calling is better than raising or folding. Dont just do something out of reflex.” Also discuss H.A.L.T and why it is good in theory although the h and l are almost constants with me. Oh and a big one is that theres no point in being the 10th best poker player in the world if the top 9 are at the same table as you. This is similar to if you can’t spot the sucker, you are the sucker. So where you play and who you play against is actually under your control.

Ok im not going to number these since i have no desire to go back and change the order to make things flow better in this imaginary book. Instead ill just write down some random chapter topics that are and arent strategy related.

Opinion: in Cincinnati kid, lady fingers was base dealing for “the man”

Opinion: kgb was bluffing on the final hand in rounders.

Strategy: general tells that are easiest to spot. (Vein in neck, looking at hole cards after flop)

Humor: the lesser known poker hand nick names.

Random: quick and simple strategy guides for other casino games.

Random: ways card sharps and cheaters cheat.

Strategy: starting hands (with an emphasis on why some arent that good.)

Strategy: simple way to calculate pot odds (2.5% method)

Opinion: lies most poker players tell themselves.

Opinion: times pop culture got poker wrong.

History: biggest online poker scandals.

History: biggest/famous cash games.

Opinion: ranking the best poker or gambling movies.

Opinion: the best poker books.

History: the evolution of poker

Random: traditional popular poker variants (stud, omaha, triple draw lo ball)

Random: other random poker variants (midnight baseball)

Humor: best poker player insults.

There would be more dtrategy chapters then what i listed,  but thats not as much fun to come up with.

Obviously most chapters would have a quote about poker at the top of the chapter’s first page cause you just have to do that. It might be the law.

Now that i think about it if you read through all the history of this blog you probably have most of these chapters already writen.


New Football League

I need to stop getting ideas for blog posts from stuff I read on Uproxx.  I love that site, but where’s all my originality?  Anyways, they had an article today revisiting the XFL…. for some reason. I have no idea what prompted it, and wouldn’t be surprised if at one point an editor over there said “Holy shit, I completely forgot that was a thing that actually happened.”  The article had a link to an interview Bob Costas did with Vince McMahon around the time the league was starting to circle the drain.  I watched the first half of it.

Two things jumped out to me regarding the video and the article. Firstly, I remember the XFL very differently than what Vince was promoting in that interview. Secondly, I think it could have worked if they had taken a different approach. I’m now going to do that thing where I pontificate without doing virtually any fact checking despite the fact that it would be very easy to do. I’ll rely on my some what spotty memory and ignore any factual errors since no one actually reads this blog.

Going back to that first point, I remember a lot of the promotion of the XFL, especially from Stone Cold, or the Rock, was highlighting the fact that it was supposed to be better than the NFL. More bad ass. It would give the fans what they really wanted. I remember thinking that this was a terrible idea.  It was fine to promote yourself as an alternative, but to say you are better was just asking for a beat down.  In the interview I watched, Vince basically stated that NFL football, the play on the field, is the best, but that the XFL had a quality product once teams got more practice time in and got acclimated to the rules.

The second point, and the one I wanted to explore, was my thought that the XFL could probably have worked, but only if it had taken a different approach.  I really think they did them selves a disservice by trying to combine the whole WWF Attitude thing with football. Having WWF announcers and wrestlers do promos for the games may have made sense for week one when there was a novelty factor, but after that, it just seemed campy.  Your taking something that is staged, but with real athletes, and trying to force it on real athletes who are doing something that is impossible to script.  The was an incongruity to it that was almost palpable.

If the XFL was to work the first thing you would need to do is divorce it from wrestling.  Maybe not a full divorce, but at least a trial separation.  I think that for the rest of my ideas on how an XFL, or just a plain alternative pro football league could work, lets pretend like it was launched today.

As far as the play on the field, it’s hard to top the NFL since they have been refining it for the last 80 years.  Still there are probably some tweaks they could make that would set them apart without making it seem too gimicky. The first tweak would be regarding the kicking game. Make it illegal to kick a ball out of bounds. Just like they do on kick offs where a ball kicked off the sidelines resulting in a placement at the 40, extend this to the back of the endzone. This way every kick has a chance of being returned, and in fact make it so you can’t call fair catches or down the ball on a kick or punt.  It won’t result in a ton of crazy highlights on every kickoff, but it should add one or two more per game.

Speaking of kicking, anything over 50 yards is 4 points, and extra points are from the 25 yard line. If you block an extra point you can try to take it the other way. Not sure why that isn’t an option in the NFL.

Uniforms – I’ve heard it mentioned that having a hard shell for a helmet is actually one of the worse things you can do to prevent concussions. If this league would want to succeed it would need to embrace emerging technologies, especially when it comes to player protection. So have a similar helmet but with a soft leather outer shell that can displace some of the energy created during a collision.  Add in the Gforce meters for added safety.

Another game change that would need to be considered is shrinking the number of players on the field at one time.  I think that while the number in the NFL, 11, is good, this league would benefit by having only three lineman, with a mandatory two TEs on the line for each snap. It would allow for more room for skill players to move around – less crowded. Also go with the college rule of only needing one foot in bounds for a catch. Anything that makes it easier for a team to move the ball. Nothing worse than having people at home watching a bunch of scrubs in a battle of field position. I also think the college time keeping system in the last 2 or so minutes where a first down stops the clock, would need to be implemented.

Each team would need to be backed by a former Star. I’m not sure exactly how this would work, but starting out a new league and trying to pretend there is beef between two teams that have never played before is fucking silly.  Instead imagine a team that is owned/represented by Joe Montana playing against a team under Dan Marino.  Barry Sanders vs. Eddie George.  You get the idea.  I’m not sure what the official capacity would be, but something that would give it a more organic flare or flavor to separate the teams beyond what ever random cities would actually support a team.

The key to something like that is you wouldn’t want to go to far and make it all about the former stars and do cheesy promos with them as if this alternate pro league football matchup is goign to settle some beef leftover from their NFL days.  In fact it doesn’t have to be just NFL guys, but have other athletes or celebs put their brand behind a team might work as long as the individual or group isn’t cheesy.  I know KISS has an arena league team, and that seems lame as hell to me cause that rock band is all about marketing.  Bon Jovi with the Philadelphia… soul? with the arena league was a different animal. Imagine a team owned by Metallica going up against a team owned by Floyd Mayweather. I could get behind that.

Speaking of former NFL stars, the goal couldn’t just be to put young an up and coming players who may have been missed by the NFL.  You would need to have guys like Terrel Ownes, players past their prime, looking for a pay check, still has some star appeal, but maybe not as good at this point as a guy fresh out of college that didn’t make an NFL practice squad.  If you are designing those two characters on madden, the young guy might be a 65 and TO a 63, so it would benefit the Team more to have the young guy with the 65 rating, but for the sovency of the league it would be better to have TO with a rating of 63.  Now, not all TOs, but just one or two per team would be good, just so you have people at home going, holy shit, I wondered what happened to “That Guy”.

I also think the XFL had a good idea with having the fans getter better access to the players, but they did that in some of the worse ways possible, like by stalking them during the game like they were celebs at LAX and the XFL camera men were the paparazzi. Instead you could have voting via twitter, or text, or whatever, for the game MVP. Between plays, put more emphasis on some of the players, and not so much on analysis of the play that just happened, especially if it wasn’t a particularly interesting play.

Flash on the screen the players twitter handles along with their other stats.

Obviously this could go to far and you could have stuff where you vote on benching a struggling player; that should still be up to the coaches. More polls might not be a bad thing during the game however, provided fans watching the games actually voted.  In a similar vein you could have fans tweeting in questions for the broadcasters, especially when they have a guest in the booth which you would want to do fairly often.  The guest wouldn’t need to just be a football person, and if they have something to plug, fine whatever. It would be a tough juggling act since the guest drop in use to be a thing they did in NFL games but don’t really do any more.

This should be obvious, but the season should be short. Have several scrimmages between teams before the season starts so that it looks like real football for week 1.  Don’t air the preseason games/scrimmages, and in fact you might even want those games to be played in cities that don’t have a team just to generate some buzz nation wide in larger markets.  This would also make the idea of seeing a home game slightly more exclusive for the regular season than if they had a bunch of pre season games in their home market.

Speaking of playing in other cities, why not have each team have to play one game abroad. Mexico, Japan, China, Germany, Sweden, Australia, South Africa.  Set the games during NFLs off season and have the teams play an odd number of games like 11. five home games. Five road games. And one international game where the time of the game is conducive to that country’s market.  This may mean that one of the games a team plays wouldn’t air over here live until 7 am. But it’s just one game where some US fans might not want to get up to watch, but if you could set up an ongoing sister cities thing, that might be huge down the line.

Imagine an XFL team that is based out of Reno, also having a yearly game in Sidney Australia. It would also be a nice fringe benefit for the players on those teams to see some parts of the world and travel.  Give them an extra week during that trip so they play at home on a sunday and then instead of flying over seas and playing the next sunday, have them go over there, tour, glad hand the locals, play the following tuesday, and then not play till the following sunday.  So three games in the course of four sundays.  Since it is already a shortened schedule this would count as their sort of bye week.

Ok I think I’m out of ideas for the most part. Oh wait one more. Embrace technology. I think I said that before, but what I mean here is that stuff like first downs, instead of having the ref put the ball down and bring out the chains, put sensors in the football that will allow an automatic triangulation of where the ball is when it is spotted and if it has reached the line of gain. Just speed up that whole process. Same goes with instant replay. Don’t have the field judge go under the hood, just have someone in the booth or at the home office quickly rule within 90 seconds.

I can’t believe I forgot one of the biggest things, Celebrations. I think that the NFL is way too strict on it’s players having fun during a game, but the NFL is cautionary tale of what the opposite looks like and it wasn’t good. So bring back dunking over the goal post, but no endzone dances that last more than 15 seconds. Yes you can mike up players, but no they can’t have incomprehensible nick names instead of their real names on their jersey. Yeah go ahead and put advertisements on their uniforms, but don’t make it look obnoxious.

Scenes that made me fall in love with TV shows

I was driving to work at the hotel tonight when I started laughing for what an outside observer must have thought was no reason.  I am pretty sure my brain works differently than most others, so I won’t even try to explain the weird string of thoughts that led me from thinking about the 50 bucks I won playing poker and into the Skytanic episode of Archer.  All I know is that I was driving down the quite back roads between Harrisburg and Hershey and I just started laughing while thinking of “M as in Mancy”.

Skytanic was the first episode I saw of Archer and I think it might be the best episode. The final scene where Archer and Lana try to defuse a bomb pretty much epitomizes everything that is great about that show, and I think it was that scene that made me officially fall in love with Archer.. the show not the character.

So what other scenes from my favorite TV shows made me fall in love with them? This is going to be tough because as time goes on it is easier to remember your favorite moments than it is to remember what first got you hooked. Still I’m going to make my best effort to remember.  I might end up leaving out some of my all time favorite shows if I can’t remember anything swoon worthy, but lets start possibly my most swooniest show of all time; The Wire.

I read an article where someone had asked a lot of the greatest authors of the 20th century if they try to write symoblism into their novels.  Most said that it was more of a byproduct than an a purposefully act. If you watch this scene, it is clear that David Simon was in the later category.  This scene showed me that not only was the show more complex and nuanced than any other cops vs bad guys tv show i’d seen before, but that the “bad guys” were some of the most tragic and compelling characters.

Californication may not have always been a great show but it was always a good show that was often fun, funny, and never dull. This scene in the season finale of the second season showed that the show was capable of showing real heart much in the same way this sentence showcases my limited vocabulary. The scene on its own, means very little, but if you watched it in the context of the entire season, it kind of hits you. Also, how perfect was the song selection for that scene. If you know the backstory of that song … ughhh it gets your right in the feels big time.

ER – Love’s Labours Lost

This might be a cheat, but I have to list the entire episode of ER. I know that from the beginning ER was different than other medical shows since it wasn’t afraid to show the doctors and nurses loose and make mistakes. This episode showed (there’s that word again) that even the best doctors can do everything in their power, to the best of their ability, and make the best judgments at the time with the information they have, and it can all turn out in heartbreak. Per Wikipedia:  In 1997, TV Guide ranked it as the third in its list of the 100 Greatest Episodes of All-Time.[2] In 2009, it ranked the episode sixth”

I can’t really find a clip that does that episode justice, so that is another great scene that I can’t watch with out crying like a child. (btw I’m totally doing a list of the best handled deaths of major characters in TV history at some point and this has to be near the top.)

I’ve tried to explain to people why I loved this scene in breaking bad. It’s hard to explain but the story mike tells just draws me in.  I remember when I first saw it, my initial reaction was that the actor must have once been a cop who actually did that. It felt so real. I was really into the show before this scene, but this scene is the first one I really wanted other people to see so that I could talk with them about it. That feeling went through the roof during the final scene of season 4, but this came first.

This one probably shouldn’t count since I never really loved this show, but this scene totally got me hooked, and yes it is the very first scene of the series. Let me give you some back story. My buddy Brandon and I were talking and he asked me about “BSG” and I was like “What the fuck is that?” and he was surprised that I had never watched Battlestar Galactica. This is a major issue with me where my friends are completely floored when they find out that there is some “nerd thing” that i’m not into. Most of my friends aren’t really nerds so they just assume that since I am that I and all nerds are all into the same stuff.  I’ve had the same type of discussion when revealing that I never played World of War Craft, Never went to a Comicon (although I guess that changed a month ago), never played Magic the Gathering or any other turn based card game, never heard of “Watchmen” before that awesome trailer came out, and have no idea what the hell star or mine craft are.

Brandon starts to tell me how great BSG is and i’m like, I remember the show from when I was a kid, it was just a horse shit rip off of buck rogers which was a rip off of star wars. He tells me they re did it for SciFi channel and I roll my eyes so hard i’m surprised I didn’t loose sight in both eyes. He tells me to trust him and to try it out, so a month later I was bored and decided to download the first episode so that I could at least clown Brandon for having terrible taste. So I fire up the first episode. After probably 90 seconds I hit pause and yell out “fuck”.  I knew then, after just 10 seconds, that I would end up watching ever single episode of that show no matter how bad it got as it went on.  The introduction text was all I needed.  What a great way to reboot and also sequel off the original.

Ok let’s get some quick hits here where I just list some more of my favorite shows and what I think are the scenes that got me hooked without too much explanation (since for some of them it’s been too long since I last watched them) and no youtube clips (cause i’m tired of looking videos up on the internet that isn’t porn). Also like Battlestar Galactica some of my love for these shows has waned quite severely at points.

The Shield: When Vic shot Terry (spoilers I guess)

Boardwalk Empire: Al Capone showing up and saying something like “First I need a shower, and then some chow, and then you and me are going to sit down, and talk about how’s gonna die”

Sons of Anarchy: The season 3 (?) final scene where they are all in the paddy wagon and you hear Jax’s dad’s voice over reveal that it was Gemma who was going to kill him.

Mad Men: Don’s finger bang business deal closer.

Dexter: …. I don’t know, maybe Rita’s death, but really show was downhill from there.

Game of thrones: I guess when Ned Stark got the Ax.

It’s always sunny: cut to Mac and Dennis doing push ups in the court room

The office: “I hit myself in the head with the telephone”


Five batman villians that should not appear on gotham

I did this oncw before where i saw an article listing the top 10 comicbook something and i decided to do my own list before reading theirs.

On uproxx i saw there was an article where they were going to list the top 5 batman villians that shoulsnt be on gotham. It reminds me of something that should have happened on smallville. They had him fight doomsday and defeat darkseid before he actually became superman… thats silly.

When i saw the title of the article my first thought was “the joker has to be number one” .  One of the best things about the joker is that his back story is a mystery, although some people have tried to fill in the blanks with unimpressive results. So if they tried to give him an origin story it would take away from his chaotic mystique.

So that’s my guess for number one. Number 2 should be Bane. First of all, gotham is really supposed to be about james gordon, so bane really only works when going up against batman. Also his origin has almost nothing to do with gotham i think.

The next three are harder to come up with, but i feel confident in guessing the red hood since you need batman to create him. So he is number 3.

Harley quinn, maybe she could show up as a regular kid who wants to be a doctor or something, but she isn’t really much of anything without the joker. So She is number 4.

Kgbeast? I have no idea about number 5. Im guessing that onomonpeia will make the list if the person writing the article hates kevin smith. They could pull something stupid and say clark kent hoping to refer to the sups v batman stuff in the upcomming movie or the batman returns storyline.

That would be lame though. Amanda waller? Maybe, it would probably be dumb if she was in it since i think of her as a dc univers type characater and not just gotham.

Speaking of which, my final vote for number five is ras al ghul. I dont know how to spell that. I know they have tried to tie him to gotham in the past, but its hard to picture jim gordon going up against the league of assasins.

Lets see what uproxx listed: http://uproxx.com/gammasquad/2014/09/the-5-batman-villains-who-should-never-ever-show-up-on-gotham/

Well if u followed the link u will see i completly missed the spirit of the article. Their article was about the lamest villians like kite man.

NFL week 2 predictions

I tried this several years ago, and I sucked so hard that I gave up after 4 weeks, but here we go again!!!!!  I’m going to give my predictions for each game and then give detailed well thought out analysis.

Miami +1 @ Buffalo
Buffalo is just barely favored in this match up of teams I don’t care about.  I’m picking Miami to cover since I think they beat a harder team last week, more convincingly, and just seem to have better weapons.

Jax +6 @ Redskins
Jacksonville played not to loose in the second half of their game last week.  If they play to win all game, they should cover the spread, which is what I predict.

Dal +3.5 @ Tenn
I hate dallas so i’m going to pick Tennessee even though i think that is probably a mistake.

Arizona -2 @ NYG
I have no idea why the giants blow so hard the past two season, but they do, and Arizona is on the rise over the same period. I pick Arizona.

Pats -5.5 @ Minn
AP is out because he is lazy and doesn’t know how to use his words, so a tough matchup just got harder. Should be easy for the Pats to cover.

Big Easy -6 @ Cle
Logically this matchup should favor the Saints and they shouldn’t have any problem handling the spread in this game…. sooooo that’s what i’m predicting.

Hotlanta +6 @ Cinci
I don’t know why but I am not sold on the Bengals being a top tier team. I guess it is because i’ve heard it so many times before, and every time that end up under performing. Lets go with Atlanta.

Rams + 5.5 @ Bucs
Doug martin is hurt and bucs didn’t look that good last week, although neither did the rams. I’m picking the Rams.

Fuck Pete Carrol -5.5 @ Whales Vagina
Even though Phillip Rivers looks like an asshole, he doesn’t look like as much of an asshole as Pete Carrol looks like an asshole. Not really the basis for picking a gave, but i’m still going with SD.

Houston -3 @ Oak Town
Oakland is a mess and Houston didn’t look to bad last week. I choose you Houston.

Jets +7.5 @ G.B
The packers are giving up more than a touchdown so Vegas must be very confident in them. I don’t know if I’m that confident but How can you possible pick for the Jets…ever… for any reason.  I’m hopping the Pack are going to take their week 1 frustrations out on the Jets and cover.

K.C +11.5 @ Denver
Thats a big spread, but KC sucks and Denver is good and Payton isn’t adverse to running the score up on teams. Still, it’s just too big a spread and i’m picking the chiefs.

Bears +7 @ 49ers
I”m a niners fan so i’m picking them to cover even though i would feel much more confident if the line was closer to 4 or 5.

Philly +3 @ Indy
Before seeing the line I thought this game was kind of a push, so now i’m just going with the dog and picking the Eagles.


When there’s too much passion for nuance

I apologize if this post ends up rambling and unfocused, but its honestly too big a topic and i’m far too lazy to plot out and organize my thoughts in advance. (also I hate not having images in a post so i’m going to toss in adorable animal pictures so that it will lighten the mood)

I love listening to sports talk radio usually.  The best shows have a mixture where analysis and humor make up the lion’s share of the show. Throw in some special guests calling in where those segments factoring for maybe 15 to 20 percent of the show, maybe more if it is someone actually interesting and not just a random ex player who is just plugging some random product. Throw in a healthy does of editorial pontificating from the host or hosts, and on occasion add in a smidge of outrage.

A “smidge” isn’t exactly a measurable quantity so it’s hard to define when there’s too much outrage, especially since it depends on many factors. Is the host outraged often? How long has this host(s) been outraged about the same topic?  Is every show covering the same topic with the same measure of outrage?  Is the topic one that deserves such apoplectic discussions? Does the person shouting into the microphone seem/sound sincere.

Right now I am kind of getting weary of listening to the outrage surrounding the Ray Rice/Roger Goodell/Domestic Violence scandal that is dominating the airwaves every day, and I hate that I feel that way.  If I’m looking at my list above of reasons outrage might turn me off from wanting to listen to a broadcast, I find that it contains a mixed bag that both hurts and helps the discussion of this topic.

Yes this topic is obviously one that deserves to be discussed with a high degree of gravitas and passion. I truly believe most of the people that are shouting the loudest are in fact sincere and are not just posturing like they do on so many other topics. Sadly many of the host shouting the loudest are also the ones who shout the loudest regarding most every topic they cover.  Yes every host is covering this same topic almost constantly.

I’ve actually found myself listening to more NPR as of late because i’m getting tired of listening to everyone’s passionate opinions, especially since I can’t actively take part in the discussions when I think there is a point of clarification that needs to be made. However, when I do listen to sports talk radio I find myself keying in on a few things that should be recognized more than they are.  The number one of which is that an abundance of passion makes it difficult to have a nuanced discussion.

(I know, that was a long way to go to actually get to the meat of this post)

I know it sounds like i’m contradicting myself when I say that the passion is good in one breath and then condemn it in another.  Let me clarify. I think passion works best when it is reserved for moments when it is truly warranted, when it is organic, when it is the only rational reaction.  When you view the Ray Rice video from the elevator, there is no reason to not feel anger at what he did and condemn him with great passion.  There is nothing about that kind of reaction that will detract from the over all discussion on how the NFL could/should be handling this crisis.

My problem with all this passion is when it bleeds over into discussions about whether Roger Goodell had access to the elevator video and if he should be fired and if Greg Hardy or Ray Mcdonald should be playing. Instead of having a nuanced conversation where you investigate the grey areas  that surround those situations, you instead get black and white responses that are often rushed.  I’ll give you an example of this form Jay Mohr’s radio show today.  (btw, I love pretty much love everything Jay does and think he has by far the most entertaining sports show period.)

Today Mohr was interviewing the reporter who interviewed Roger Goodell, I forget her name and am too lazy to look it up, but just from the brief interview it was clear she was a top notch journalist. They way she responded to Jay’s questions made me kind of sad that there probably aren’t enough people doing the work she does thanks to all the newspapers dying.  Anyways, at one point she said she couldn’t believe or understand why Hardy for the Panthers was still playing after being convicted of threatening and assaulting his girlfriend. Then as an aside she mentioned that the conviction is currently being appealed.  Jay then jumped in and agreed with her and started to play a hypothetical devil’s advocate and ran through a scenario where it turns out it was just a situation where the girlfriend was mad and concocted the story. He prefaces the hypothetical with a line something like “What would be the worse case scenario if he was suspended now and ….”  As he got to the end of the scenario in which Hardy was actually innocent (which no one really thinks is a possibility) he cut him self short before he stated what it would mean for hardy.

You could hear that he had worked through the mental exercise and the result didn’t fit at all with the narrative him and the guest were weaving. So instead of completing the thought, he just switched back to saying that Hardy should be suspended based on the fact that the owner of the carolina panthers was crying (trust me that part actually makes sense if you know the context of why the owner was crying.)

This gets to the crux of the problem right now.  We have a lot of black and white issues that are obvious and with virtually no ambiguity.  What ray Rice did was deplorable. The original suspensions of two games was woefully light given what happened on the elevator.  The NFL (and most other sports leagues) have not done nearly enough to fight the crisis of domestic abuse amongst its players. Those points shouldn’t really be up for a debate of any kind, let alone a long drawn out nuanced debate.

But whether or not Greg Hardy should be suspended right now even though his case in the judicial system is currently under appeals is something that is not nearly as black and white and really should be judged dispassionately. Once again, I’m guessing the guy is probably a piece of shit that he should never play football again. But that isn’t what needs to be discussed. The question in my mind is what happens if we suspend someone and they end up being found not guilty?  If we pay them for the games they missed does that compensate them for the time missed on the playing field helping his team?

If you go into those questions full of passion in the form of rage, you are going to probably come up with the answers that “Who cares he is getting paid” or “Yeah but he’s probably guilty so who cares”.  Those are arguments that are easy to argue on their merits but hard to discuss in the real world since the person giving them isn’t usually open to listening to a rebuttal.

My opinion is that regardless of what everyone believes to be true at the moment, you need to plan for all the possible scenarios and act accordingly so that if possible, no one is unfairly punished.  There’s two main scenarios here; 1. His original guilty conviction is up held, or 2. The verdict is over turned and he is obstensibly found not guilty (although legally I think it would be more of a mistrial or something along those lines).

In scenario number 1 there is ultimately no harm done if we follow whatever protocal is in place to punish someone. (not sure if this would be the six game suspension, or year long, or whatever else.) and suspend him right now. With scenario number 1 if you wait till after the legal case is settled, then you still have the ability to punish them the same way you would if you suspended them right now, the only difference is when the punishment starts. The number of games should be the same, with the only exception being in a situation where he never plays again because of the type of suspension or because of other football related reasons like age or playing ability forces him out of the league.

In scenario number 2, where he’s surprisingly innocent (once again – highly unlikely) if we suspended him right now before the appeal is finalized, then those games are gone forever. Yes he would get paid for them, but I like to think that most NFL players care about more than just the money and would worry about what their absence would have on their team mates. I think many people in the world who work as part of a team with a shared goal might relate to this.  In scenario number 2 if we waited to suspend him till after the case is concluded, then there would ultimately be no loss of games or negative impact on his team mates (aside from the distraction caused by the case).

Normally I hate trying to solve one question/argument by invoking a somewhat hyperbolic hypothetical situation, but lets do it anyways to show my point.

If it is the start of the play offs and Geisel found something on Tom Bradys phone that pissed her off to the point that she wanted to ruin him, she could call the cops, say golden boy threatened her, press charges, etc.. etc..  In this very very very unlikely situation, I don’t think many people would be pushing for an automatic suspension of Brady while we wait for the legal matter to play itself out.  (I guess there are some real world parallels with what happened with Kobe in Colorado, although that whole thing was sketchy as hell.)

I understand that this is an example of Reductio ad absurdum (kind of)  and that it is far from an apples to apples situation when compared to Hardy.  Still I think the line of thinking is still sound and is even more applicable when compared to Ray Mcdonald.  Currently he has not been found guilty of a crime.  That might change in the near future, but people are already saying that he must be suspended right now and that there isn’t a reason to wait till the legal process finishes.  There is less publicly known about the Ray Mcdonald situation than there is with either Ray Rice or Hardy, but people still fell empowered to speak on it with ultimate authority.

I said that it is passion that is keeping us from having nuanced conversations, but I think impatience is also affecting these debates.

Let’s just say right up front that being impatient is a perfectly acceptable reaction to these situations.  When something awful happens you want it to be rectified immediately, and you can look all over the news for instances where this is true.  How much better would the situation with that kid who got shot in missouri be if the investigation was wrapped up in a week (I can’t believe I can’t remember the name of the town. The kids name was Michael Brown I think).

Impatience is amplified by any  void in information.  With Ray Rice I think one of the major mistakes the commissioner made was not relaying more details of the investigation as it went.  It’s hard to side with him when we don’t know what was presented to him and what his thought process was when he made each misstep along the way.  That void of knowledge begs to be filled and is often done so by people inserting what makes the most sense to them or fits in with whatever they had previously believed.  It is rare that someone is presented with only partial information and decides to fill in the gaps with something that contradicts their previous assumptions.

By my count we have three things working against any hope for a productive conversation; anger, impatience, and ignorance.  I’ve changed passion to anger since it is probably more accurate a term for what most people are feeling.  I should also qualify that the word ignorance should not be viewed as either a positive or negative. It is just a descriptor or maybe a measurement.  I am ignorant to many many things, but that doesn’t mean i should feel ashamed about most of them.  I am ignorant to the farming techniques used in the 1400s in central China, but why would i or should I know about that topic.

So I think I did a pretty good job of setting up why I think it is near impossible to discuss all this in most forums, especially sports talk radio. But now i’m going to push my luck and delve into Roger Goodell and the missteps he’s made and whether he should be fired.  I know a lot of people would start this type of topic with their verdict and then work back words.  I don’t like that in this situation because I think if you are reading this you probably already have your own opinion and that if the one I give is in opposition to yours, then anything I say afterwards will be colored in a negative light.

I said before that the original two game suspension was way too light given what Ray Rice did.  I say that based on the knowledge we have now of the event, thanks to TMZ getting a hold of the video.  I know that a lot of people were outraged by the almost frivolous nature of the punishment that was doled out, especially when compared to the very harsh penalties that repeat substance abuse offenders were experiencing.  While I agree it was too light, even before we saw the video, I think there was a few things that influenced Goodell’s decision that are often over looked or trivialized by those discussing this whole cluster fuck. (and yeah i know i’m about to make some assumptions in the face of gaps of knowledge and that I had just mentioned how that shouldn’t be done, but in this case I’m not trying to input my thoughts, but instead trying to place myself in someone else’s shoes and give them some measure of benefit of doubt.)

When Goodell imposed the two game suspension and half million dollar fine (i think that was the amount) I think he probably wanted to give him a harsher sentence but didn’t for the following reasons:

  • Janay and Ray were still together and there was treatment/counselling going on.
  • The District attorney (or what ever law/justice people) only gave Ray a slap on the wrist which would imply that whatever occurred in the elevator couldn’t have been as sever as what we later found out.
  • The story he heard from Ray and Janay gave off at least some semblance of a mental picture where Janay had started the fight and that maybe she was out of control and that Ray did not do a good enough job of trying to restrain his fiance.
  • Both parties were very drunk judging by the 2 bottles of hard liquor between 4 people earlier in the night and maybe the inebriation played a role in how quickly and totally incapacitated Janay was in the video outside the elevator.
  • If Goodell pushed too hard in punishing Rice, would the raven’s and the players union push back. Would the players association try to fight it, especially if their player is claiming to be innocent.

Also, I highly doubt that he saw the video from inside the elevator.  If he had seen it, there was no reason to lie and say he didn’t.  I can’t think of any reason why he would view the video and only give a two game suspension.  I know there are lot of talks of a cover up, but i’m not sure exactly what people thinks Goodell would have been covering up at that time he supposedly saw the video.  There is nothing special about Rice that would make him want to protect him.  If he had seen it he would have known that it was possible if not probable that the video would get out so why go so soft on the punishment?  The idea that he saw the video and for some reason acted the way he did makes no sense to me.

I think either the NFL never got the video, or if someone there did get it as the associated press is reporting they did, then it wasn’t forwarded to Goodell for some random reason, probably incompetence. As far as journalistic integrity goes, I would rank the AP way above TMZ, but even still I kind of have my misgivings about their report. I guess i’m just a little jaded by this point.

With all the outstanding issues I listed above, I still think that even if Goodell thought that 2 games was the fairest punishment given the extenuating circumstance, he still should have given a lengthier suspension knowing that it would send a stronger message and that there would still be avenues for Rice to appeal through the players union if he wanted to fight the length.

So yes I think Goodell messed up in this regard. I’m not sure it is enough to warrant him being fired, especially since he admitted he screwed up later and amended the policy for domestic abuse to fall in line with something most people agreed is a pretty good set of punishments.

uggghhhhhh this is a long post. This is actually day 2 of me randomly adding and editing this post as I find time to work on it, so if you are actually reading it; Good for you.

Earlier today it was reported that Adrienne Peterson was indicted on child beating (not the actual name of the charge) and that he is turning himself in to the texas authorities.  He has admitted to using a switch (thin tree limb specifically used for hitting children) to punish his kid, and says that is how he was punished when he was a kid.  There are also text messages he sent to the child’s mother where he said he felt guilty about how much pain the switch had caused. So things aren’t looking good for him.  Since he is headed down to texas for booking he has been deactivated for this sunday by the vikes.

It will be interested to see if the people who are clamoring for Ray Mcdonald and Greg Hardy to be suspended while their cases are still in the legal process, will call for Peterson to also be suspended while the case is making its way through the legal system.  I know there are difference between someone going overboard disciplining their kid and someone beating their wife because they can’t control their anger, but I don’t feel comfortable trying to analyse those difference to determine if one deserves more swift and sever punishment than the other in either our legal system or the NFL self policing system.


Great actresses with great nudity

This will probably go down as one of the more shallow posts I ever make, but you can blame Eva Green’s hotness in Sin City for that. I wasn’t really that excited to see the second Sin City movie since I wasn’t really over the moon for the first one. Yeah I thought artistically it did a lot of really cool stuff, but the story wasn’t really that amazing, and there was nothing at the end that made me want to see what happens next. So if I am being honest, the only reason I didn’t wait for “Sin City a Dame to Kill For” to come out on DVD is because I heard about hot crazy hot and naked Eva Green gets in the movie.

There was only one other person in the movie theater when I went and saw the movie which made the whole thing feel much more creepy especially once Eva started getting crazy naked. The awesomeness of her nakedness was so much better than the rest of the movie that it made it kind of a pain to watch the rest of the movie once her part of the story was completed.

Thinking about her nakedness not just in Sin City but in a lot of her roles (and yeah I have thought about this many times) led me to write this post where I plan on listing on the actresses who get way more naked than their acting talent requires. Jesus this is going to be shallow.

I’m not saying that actresses who aren’t great at their craft have to get naked, but it’s just that after an actress is established, it becomes more and more rare for them to bare all for what I’m sure is a whole host of reasons. But there are a few who still bare all after they’ve made it and… you know what, I’m over explaining it. Here is some of the best actresses who love to get nekkid.

  1. Eva Green

Maybe I’m over estimating her acting ability now that I think about it. I’ve never actually seen her anything where I know people stood up and said, wow what amazing acting. But she was good in Casino Royale… and that might be the only thing I’ve ever seen her do where she wasn’t crazy naked half the time. This year has been pretty great in terms of Eva Green boobeg… boobige…. boobijsh… I don’t know how you would spell that non word but it’s the word boob with the end of the word verbiage so I guess boobiage. Ok back on track, she had a topless sex scene in 300 rise of an empire… that really didn’t need to be in that movie at all. Then she was in the Show time original series Penny Dreadful where she was possessed/sexed up by a demon and was completely naked in that scene. Now in Sin city she is naked in about half her scenes. Maybe more depending on what you consider one scene versus another. I really hope someone releases the original video of her sin city stuff so we can see her not in black and white. If you want to see maybe the best Eva Green nakedness, you’ll probably want to check out the dreamers which is a small movie about… I have no idea. All I know is that she gets with in inches of Boardwalk Empire’s jimmy darmody’s flacid cock in the movie and is naked throughout half the movie… or at least the only parts of the movie I watched.

  1. Rosario Dawson

god i want to be the color green so bad

A cast-mate of Eva’s from Sin City, Rosario started out with her first topless scene in “He Got Game” and then I assumed would have reached peak nakedness in Alexander, where they probably paid her a bunch of money so they could be the first to have her be crazy naked. At this point she was pretty much a star and was doing a combination of big budget movies as well as some smaller stuff that would satisfy her creative ambitions. I assumed from there on out she wouldn’t do any other nude stuff, aside from maybe just a very quick darkly light scene here or there, but then she did Trance. what is crazy about the nude scene she did in this movie is that she did shaved, full frontal. There’s almost no imaginable way for her to be more naked on camera unless she was doing straight up porn.

  1. Kate Winslet

Maybe not as hot as some of the rest on this list (god this is shallow), Kate got her big break in Titanic and Got big time naked in that, and never really slowed down. She mostly does more artistic films like that one where she was a Nazi that taught a kid to read or something which probably lends itself to more credibility to the nude scenes vs. some of the nude work Green does in movies like 300 and TV shows like Penny Dreadfull where it’s not really that important to the story. She’s done so many nude scnes that supposedly the constant application and removal of merkins has caused her to not be able to grow any hair down by her no no place any more.

  1. Monica Bellucci

I think Monic Bellucci is the patron Saint of great actresses who get naked. She’s done lots of really great nude scenes and one awful awful nude scene no one should ever watch. If you watch the movie irreversible there’s a nice nude scene with her and the guy who is her husband in the movie I think. It’s nothing special. Don’t watch any more of the movie. Yes there’s another sex scene with her but it is very very long and very very non-consensual. Supposedly a lot of people left the theatres during that scene when it was shown and I can understand why. Lets get back to her being naked in movies that won’t make you cry your self to sleep. Just google her name and you’ll see that some guys who I swear to god aren’t me have cobbled together best of sex scene compilations that you can waste a good 15 minutes watching. Ok maybe using the word waste isn’t appropriate since, it’s never a waste to see something that lovely

5.Diane Kruger

I almost forgot to include her which would have been a shame if you have ever seen the directors cut of Troy in which she plays the most famous hot chick in history.

Honorable Mentions:

Some of these women could probably have made the list above but… didn’t for some reason. Look I don’t do a lot of planning or editing when I make these blog posts. I just kind of wing it.

Angelina Jolie

Heather Graham

Halle Berry

Kirsten Dunst

Olivia Wilde