A small Retraction of a Statement in Regards to Neuro-Science....

I wrote two articles on the brain.

1. http://writtting-d.blogspot.ca/2011/06/thinking-about-my-brain.html

2. http://writtting-d.blogspot.ca/2012/10/a-critique-of-three-canadian-neuro.html

These are just opinions and not scientific at all. I do still believe most of what I wrote (especially the stuff about lobotomies and testing on monkeys)...but...one thing I said in those articles is wrong. I have to make a sweeping retraction.

In the article "Thinkin' 'bout my Brain" I said that the general mapping of the brain could be different for everyone. I have to retract this claim.

The reason I thought that certain things were assigned to a certain part of my brain (that seemed different than the maps presented by neuro-science) was due to my suspicion that a case of post-concussion syndrome was causing the problems I was suffering.

I felt like the bottom right section of my brain was "off" and the troubled hearing in my right ear and headaches were due to that section being damaged. This was not the case.

Whoever drew this is a good person..

The other day I was eating a big big hamburger at some restaurant in Laval. The burger was real big and I started to notice that I haven't been able to open my jaw properly in many years. I forced my jaw open and it must have hit the breaking point of the damaged area because I was in a lot of pain for the next week or so. I read something on the net about re-positioning a dislocated jaw and tried it out. I feel so good right now. The problems I thought were due to brain shit were actually just from some dumb jaw shit. For real.

What I thought was a brain problem was actually just a jaw problem. I was very wrong about some of my opinions on my brain.

I still believe most of what I wrote in those two articles but the fact that I thought the general mapping of the brain could be vastly different from person to person is not correct. It was regular old jaw trouble that was causing my symptoms, that's all.

Stephen Chow is a Pretty Good Movie Maker, Wow.

Chow, S.

I never really did a movie review in this blog but I want to write about Stephen Chow because I think he's a really good film maker.

Yeah, I like Stephen Chow's movies. Shaolin Soccer, Kung Fu Hustle, God of Cookery, amongst others. I think he's a talented guy. Other people seem to agree with me. In fact, Comedy Legend Bill Murray once called Kung Fu Hustle the greatest comedy ever created by stating that:

"...Kung Fu Hustle, which is the supreme achievement of the modern age in terms of comedy." -Bill Murray (source)

Getting an endorsement from William "Bill" Murray for creating the "supreme achievement of the modern age in terms of comedy" is a decent bench mark.

I haven't heard of anything new from Chow in a while, I think he made an alien CG movie but it looked like it was aimed at a young audience. The latest thing from him was a trailer for an adaptation he did for Journey to the West, which is a classical Chinese literature piece from history.

From the trailer it looks like it doesn't have much at all to do with the story I'm familiar with, in fact it looks pretty odd.

History of Journey to the West

Journey to the West is credited to Wu Cheng'en in the year 1592. He composed the basic text we read today but there's a little more to it than that.

The story was based on supposed actual events of a Chinese scholar traveling to India and returning with Buddhist Scriptures to teach the people back home (around the year 600) . Over the years from 600 to 1592 the story changed dramatically. At some point along the way someone found it was too boring and added in a Monkey King (based heavily off the Hindu Deity known as Hanuman), a Pig, and a Swamp Monster to spice the story up a bit. By the time Wu Cheng'en "wrote it" in 1592 it had already taken on mythical proportions.

Like many other historical Chinese classics, I believe the ruling government of the era got their hands on it and edited it heavily. If you've read Outlaws of the Marsh (another old classic), for example, the alterations to the text almost come right off the page to you, they are so obvious. You can tell where the ruling government of the era edited in-or-out parts to promote the Emperor and other authority figures. In Journey to the West there is a totally unnecessary and out of place chapter where the Tang Emperor becomes a central figure for a brief time. It is truly out of place and really sticks out like a sore thumb when you read it.

It would be accurate to say that the story was written by many people (over the course of almost 1000 years beginning in 600), including government officials who threw in pro-authority parts. Wu Cheng'en should be called the compiler of the text, I'd say. I think what he actually did was extend the text by a few dozen chapters (it gets very repetitive at times). I have the suspicion the Wu Cheng'en may have been selling this book in the 16th century as a peridiocal/serial magazine of sorts...where in order to make more money off of it he had to keep adding repetitive demon-catching chapters to it (plus each chapter ends with a "stay tuned next time" sort of "same bat time! same bat channel!" type of hook).

The text basically goes in this format:

Chapters 1-30: Setting up the characters.
Chapters 30-99: Them journeying west as you'd expect. Yeah, 70 chapters of that.
Chapters 99-100: They finally make it and it ends.

Anyway, from the time after 1592, we've invented different forms of media. A Chinese opera of Journey to the West would come next (still being performed today), and eventually TV shows, movies, and video games would come about in the modern era.

Some of the adaptations of this text in the modern era have been awful. There's been dozens of movies from China, and not many of them, if any, are good. Japan made a TV show which was pretty bad in the 1970s ..except for the theme song which was really really funk-tastic and catchy (as shown here by Godiego). The video game adaptions are the worst because they always make the Monkey King into a pretty boy (like this example from a game called "Soul Calibur V). All the games seem to present him as a pretty boy, this is the stupidest thing they do, because the Monkey King was a filthy demon-monkey not an androgynous faggo.

Sun "Monkey King" Wukong WAS NOT PRETTY. He was a fucking demon ape who got drunk all day on earth, then got bored of that shit, went up to heaven and robbed and broke all their stuff. He didn't take shit from nobody. He even urinated on Buddha himself, that takes balls. He by no means of any stretch was an emo pretty-boy like in most adaptions of him we see lately.

As for the adaptions of the monk character (Xuan Zang) who is sent to get the scriptures, they are always as equally horrible. The only thing they have to go on is that he's "pure of heart" and that seems to translate to people interpreting the text as him being really boring and depthless as a character. Some adaptions even casted a female to be the monk because he's such a wimp.

The only good modern take on this text so far is the one which strays the most from the old formula. Many might know that Dragon Ball from Akira Toriyama is an adaption of this text as well and is probably the only good one.
 
Chow's Version

Chow's version is really good. Even though from the trailer it looks awful, it 100% is not awful at all. Why?

First of all, Chow focuses on the best part of the book, Chapters 1-30. He takes out all stupid references to the Tang Empire and pointless authority figures (which were never supposed to be in the text anyway). He doesn't even bother getting into the journeying part. He adds in godzilla-like monsters, computer graphics, interesting new original characters, a deep love story, some musical scenes, loads of comedy, borrows some Dragon Ball Z elements, gets some hot asian chicks in there, and best of all....HE MAKES THE DEMONS AS UGLY AS FUCK.

Sha Wujing (as intended)

Yes, Sha Wujing is a giant fish monster like he should be, Zhu Bajie is a filthy disgusting pig demon, and our favorite Monkey King is a fucking asshole like he's supposed to be....and he's as ugly as a mother fucker to boot.

And his Monk? Xuan Zang? He's pure but modernized. He's not a pointless wimp, he's just a nice shy guy but he's at least human. He's the only interesting Xuan Zang ever.

Conclusion 

After watching the trailer it looked like Chow's adaption of Journey to the West would be one of the worst takes on the book. It's not the case at all. His Xuan Zang is the BEST Xuan Zang, his Sha Wujin is the BEST Sha Wujin, his Zhu Bajie is the BEST Zhu Bajie, and his Sun Wukong...is the BEST.

Finally someone did it right. He took a lot of creative liberties but you have to with material that is over 1,400 years old.


END NOTE: What actually got me thinking about this book of late was a picture I saw on the North Korean government's hacked twitter account.

Whoever did it put Dennis Rodman's best pal's head on Zhu Bajie (the hideous pig demon). Pretty cute. It got me thinking about Journey to the West.

Wait...I don't want to end on that stupid picture. So here's one of Sun Wukong in a boxing ring (I can't find the source for this though).

If anyone is ever gonna make a good video game adaption of Journey to the West they should call whoever drew this picture and let him/her design the character models for it. This is what a modernized "cooler" Wukong should look like if that's what they want....NOT AN EMO PRETTY BOY.

The Wukongs models they come up with for the games they make these days do not look like they can fly up to heaven and beat the living fuck out all the assholes up there. This Wukong? He looks like he could.

(EDIT: it states "East Monkey" on the bottom of the picture. I thought that was a title but it seems to be from this art site account: http://eastmonkey.deviantart.com/, seems the picture is from that source. His name appears to be Liu Dongzi...his Wukong pics are retarded-ass good.)


With a little bit of Monkey Maaaaagic we'll see fiiiiiiireworks at niiiiiiiiiiight!

On Larry Walker (of the Montreal Expos)

Spring is here, and Warren Cromartie is on the radio and t.v. talkin' Expos so now I'm all happy today. I find I'm writing a lot about baseball again in the last little while (WBC, steroids, etc.). Baseball is something I like and it's nice and positive to write about it. I'm gonna try and write about more positive things (science, sports) in the future and try and stay away from politics. You get too negative when you get dragged into the drudges of the political world.

Larry Walker

I was listening to an interview on Mitch Melnick's TSN 690 radio program today and he was talkin' to Cro. The Cro was mentioning that his Montreal Baseball Project is well into Phase II as he is launching an economic forum/feasibility study, and he also mentioned that next year marks the 20th anniversary of the 1994 Montreal Expos team. Many know the history of that and really believe the disbanding of that squadron was the first step in the death of the Expos.

To mark the anniversary of the 1994 Expos, Montreal Baseball Project is re-uniting the team for some sort of festivity here in the city. He mentioned Pedro, Moises, Grip, Felipe, and others are gonna be part of it. I hope others show up too. Mitch asked him about Larry Walker and neither thought he would come. Cro proceeded to say that if anyone is in touch with Larry to call [him] homie, and let him know they want him there for the reunion.

Mitch mentioned that relations with Walker and Montreal are somewhat sour and I want to try and explain why that is.

Rabbit Ears

Warren mentioned that "players have rabbit ears" and I want to to try and elaborate on what he was saying.

Remember that episode of the Simpson's where Homer gets benched for Darryl Strawberry and Bart sits behind him in the rightfield stands and heckles the Straw until he sheds a single tear? That's rabbit ears.

In fact, Bart (or whichever writer wrote that bit) did not invent the "Dar-ryl" chant...fans at Fenway did (as evidenced by this video care of MLB.com):

Dar-ryyyyyyl, Dar-ryyyyyyyl.

Okay. Now, before moving on to how this relates to Larry Walker, I want to first talk about another Expos outfielder.

In the mid 1980s, the owners of each Major League club colluded to agree to not sign any free agents in order to drive their salaries down. Expos outfielder Andre Dawson left the Expos and signed a blank cheque with the Cubs. The fans had no way of knowing about the collusion that was going on, and when Dawson came to play against the Expos with the Cubs in 1987...the Expos fans booed him. The fans should have been booing the owners for colluding but with the information they had, they could only believe that Dawson jumped ship and thus they booed him under false pretenses.

Now, the same would occur in 1995...to one Larry Kenneth Robert Walker. After 1994, Claude Brochu dismantled the Expos following the cancelled season. Walker, Grissom, Wetteland, and others were traded or released. Larry Walker was let go and signed on with the Colorado Rockies. We now know that Walker wanted to take much less money to remain in Montreal but was still let go by the team in order to cut salaries. To the fans however, who had already been shafted out of a playoff berth for the first time in over a decade, were already understandably bitter and were very unfriendly to Larry when he came to Olympic Stadium to play against the Expos as a Rockie in the 1995 season. They booed the heck out of him, heckled him every at bat, and the fans in the right field bleachers gave him the Dar-yyyyl treatment something fierce.

So when Cro mentioned that "players have rabbit ears" that's what he was talking about. The fans gave Walker the Dar-yyyl treatment but who could blame them? Just like in 1987 when they booed Dawson, the fans had no idea of the back office politics going on which led to those players leaving the club. All they knew in '95 was that they just had their World Series contender team dismantled and were as bitter as hell. Once again the jeers were undeserved by the outfielder yet it is easy to see why the fans did it. How were they to know otherwise?

My sources for these two events are: I was present at the Walker "Dar-yyyl" game and very clearly remember the length and intensity of the jeers directed at Walker. While my source for the 1987 Dawson boos comes from a very reliable Expos historian (Wayne).

So,

The Walker and Montreal sourness is from a big misunderstanding by the fans, that's all. The 1995 season started on an incredibly sour note here and I don't think anyone can blame the fans for being pessimistic and quite angry that season.

It would be cool if Larry attends the Montreal Baseball Project's 1994 team reunion next summer.

The Past, Present, and Future.......of Corn.

I eat a lot of vegetables, some are over rated and some are under rated. In this essay I am going to write about my favorite vegetable.

My favorite vegetable (if you haven't guessed yet) is corn! So without further ado, let's talk about corn.

Past

The history of corn is an interesting one to say the least.

Maize or Maïs has been around since pre-historic times. Farmers in the Western Hemisphere were planting and harvesting it since around 2000 B.C.E. (well before Columbus "discovered" America of course).

Teosinte: The father of Corn.

It seems to have come from a naturally occurring weed named Teosinte, farmers most likely noticed a mutant version of Teosinte grass one afternoon and thought it was cool and brought it home with them. The strange growths on the plant's extremities were larger and stranger looking than on the normal teosinte. The farmers must have planted the seeds of the mutant strain of Teosinte and were surprised to find that it could re-create itself. Some of the new plants from the mutated teosinte developed even larger vegetables growing at its extremities.

Next, through a process of selective breeding...the farmers chose the seeds from the plant which produced the largest and most colorful (yellow) vegetables at its extremities. They sewed the seeds of only the most mutated teosinte grass plants until they further mutated into what we know now as maize or corn.

The ingenuity of farmers in what we now call South and Central America is how we originally created corn. Farmers from this region also discovered potatoes, tomatoes, and other vegetables through selective bio-engineering. After Europeans "discovered the new world" (I don't understand how anyone can say that with a straight face anymore) these vegetables started being brought back and grown in Europe too.

The original use of corn/maize was to eat. Corn is pretty tasty, I like eating it. The farmers who first created corn would grind it up with a mortar and pestle into a viscous paste...like a porridge or a thick soup. Personally, I like to cook it and cream it too because your body doesn't always digest raw corn and it tends to come out whole grain in your movements.

Present

We now produce a lot of corn as a global nation. The world produces 200,000,000 metric tonnes of corn per year. A metric tonne is 1000 kilograms or roughly 2,205 pounds. Wow, I want to write the number of pounds of corn produced by humans yearly...let's see...carry the zero...and....

 441,000,000,000 pounds

We humans produce 441 billion pounds of corn every year. That's a lot. The leading country in corn production is the USA which produces about 350,000 metric tonnes per year.

Right now, in the present, we do not produce much corn for human consumption. According to Iowa Corn Dot Org only about 10% of the corn of today is used to eat. The breakdown is roughly as so...

40% for feed
30% for fuel
20% for corn syrup
10% for raw corn, cornmeal and grits

Feed is corn used to feed livestock animals (cows, chickens, pigs). Fuel is corn used to make bio ethanol fuel to power automobiles and other fuel burning combustion devices. Corn syrup is a high fructose syrup used as a food additive. The final 10% is raw human consumption.

This is the case globally as well. We are mainly creating corn to feed livestock, make ethanol fuels and to produce high fructose corn syrup (mainly used to make cola drinks bottled by Pepsi or Coca Cola).

This is interesting of course, but it is also troubling as well. Why isn't the percentage of corn used to power vehicles higher? Why is feed and corn syrup so high? The answer seems to point to poor eating habits and much of the blame appears to be on fast food restaurants.

Many humans around the globe sustain themselves on a diet of corn-fed meat products (burgers) and high fructose corn syrup (cola). Using Macdonald's figures as an example, they serve roughly 70 million customers per day around the world. Assuming, most of those served, purchased a corn-fed livestock sandwich and a 24 ounce cup of high-fructose corn syrup...let's just take a nice round number like 50 million per day...

50 million (corn-fed livestock sandwiches) * 365 (days per annum) = 18,250,000,000 burgers

(0.71 litres *  50 million) * 365 (days per annum) = 12,957,500,000 litres

Every single year, people eat about 18.25 billion burgers and drink 12.96 billion litres of cola from MacDernDern's. Remember, this is only one fast food chain...you'd have to add up Burger King and all the others to get the full picture.

You big Fat Fuck...

What I'm getting at is the world's fast food addiction is not only an unhealthy diet but it's seriously cutting into the corn reserve. It seems if we even cut down on our global intake of pop/soda/cola we would free up a huge amount of corn reserves for the creation of ethanol fuels.

I'm trying to find the amount of Coca Cola and Pepsi consumed around the globe per year...the figures vary but an estimate of 200 billion litres per year is probably not far off. Humans drink two hundred fucking billion litres of corn syrup every year. That's fucked up.

If we even just cut down on our corn syrup consumption we could free up an insane amount of corn production for ethanol fuel.


Future

What is the future of my favorite vegetable? I'm glad you asked, because it seems there's an untapped potential for corn that we haven't been taking advantage of.

Corn Resin (PLA)

I was writing about bio-plastics the other month or so....(here)

I was surprised that we have been making corn starch into plastics since 1958 thanks to Robert P. Baer and other scientists who experimented with Amylomaize. Yes, corn starch can be used to make plastic polymers and plastic resin. Cool eh?

If you follow science, you've probably heard of the new 3D printers that everyone's talking about. Some are predicting that 3D printing will revolutionize the way we produce and manufacture plastic parts.

Basically, a computer scans an object and records all the metrics assigned to said object (length, width, height, weight, angles, contours, depth, etc.) and uses that info to shoot globs of resin to slowly but surely create an exact double of that object. Neat-o, eh?.

Where does corn fit in to this? One of the types of resin ammunition loaded into these 3D printers of the future is something called Polyactic Acid. It's great stuff, great stuff. It is a bio-plastic which is created from corn starch (or tapioca or surghum). Science types refer to it as "PLA" and it can be loaded into 3D printers to print the objects of the future.

So....can we theoretically scan any object and make a corn resin double out of it? Maybe not now, but who knows what the future holds.

Wow....corn is so cool sometimes.

Conclusion

That is why corn is my favorite vegetable. I like a lot of vegetables like potatoes and others....but corn is different. I RESPECT corn.

Hey corn....RESPECT, bro. Keep on being your bad self.

Keep up the good work...corn.

Why the Americans don't Win the World Baseball Classic

I don't watch much baseball since my team moved (Expos), but I tend to watch the World Baseball Classic still. The WBC increases the flavor a bit by putting players on to national teams and playing a tournament to decide the real champion of the world.

Japan has won both times. In fact, the USA does not even have a silver or a bronze medal even.

The first WBC:

GOLD: Japan
Silver: Cuba
Bronze: South Korea

The second WBC:

GOLD: Japan
Silver: South Korea
Bronze: Venezuela

Not even a bronze? How can this be? The first thing to look at is the quality of players going to play for the US team. An easy answer to this question is that no big name players are participating. That doesn't seem to be the case. In fact let's add up the salaries for the starting lineup of this year's USA team to get and idea of the caliber of players participating.

Teixeira, M - 22.5 million
Phillips, B. - 12 million
Rollins, J. - 11 million
Wright, D. - 15 million
Braun, R. - 6 million
Jones, A. - 8.5 million
Victorino, S. 13 million
Vogelson, R. 6.5 million

So that totals 94.5 million bucks for their starting nine this time around. You can't argue that they are not sending prime players to this tournament because they are sending 100 million dollars worth of players to this tournament.

Hmmmmm. So they send prime players....and still lose? Why is that?

I have a theory and I will try now to present it.

Are Homeruns Over Rated?

According to this data: http://www.baseball-almanac.com/hitting/hihr6.shtml,

Homeruns have risen exponentially since 1901. They were around 500 per year at the turn of the 20th century and have increased to over 5000 at the turn of the 21st century.

The question is....is hitting homeruns the most important thing? Is the best asset a team has their power? I don't think so.

Here's a really good example...who won the World Series of Major League Baseball last season? The San Francisco Giants. Now, out of the 30 MLB teams which place did they finish in team homeruns? 30th. Yes, dead last. Did only hitting 103 homeruns all year hurt or hinder them? Obviously not, they won the championship.

When did baseball go overboard on estimating the importance of homeruns? It could have just been a marketing thing.

Chicks dig the longball. It was a successful marketing campaign. Personally, I hated this commercial because it featured three players I personally despised (McGwire, Maddux, Glavine...blech). It's true though, homeruns did bring people back to the park after the strike ('94) and lockout ('95) soured relations with the fans. They took measures to increase the amount of homeruns being hit (tighter balls, steroids, lower mounds, mile-high stadium, etc.).

It's not just the fans that want homerun hitters though. The managers want these types of players too. I think it has to do with statements made by Earl Weaver...that were unfortunately taken horribly out of context.

In Earl's historical classic, "Weaver on Strategy: The Classic Work on the Art of Managing (孫子兵法)," Weaver states that the key to winning games is to rely on the "three run homerun" and he emphasized drawing walks and getting homeruns. (i.e. you have your 1 and 2 hitters guys with high OBP and your #3 hitter someone who can hit homeruns).

Now, this is a good idea, BUT, I believe that managers down the line took this advice TOO FAR. Next thing you know every team is stocked with homerun hitters...and they sacrifice every other skill in order to stock their teams with power hitters. Yet, Earl Weaver was only referring to a small section of the lineup. If we look at Earl's lineups he did indeed have good power hitters but he never sacrificed other skills just to get a power hitter into the lineup. 

Case and point: Mark Belanger

The year Weaver's Orioles won the World Series in 1970, Belanger hit .218 with 1 homerun. His OPS was .562. That's horrendous, but he was the starting shortstop for them and with good reason, he was a gold glove defensive shortstop. Weaver praised the "three run homer" and the "big innings" over small ball...but he never sacrificed defense in exchange for it. Belanger even got some key hits in the playoffs in 1970, picking up 5 runs and 2 RBIs.

Belanger is not going to help you get very many "big innings" but he will make 243 put-outs, get 552 assisted put-outs, and only make 13 errors while doing that (like he did in 1974). 

Defensive stats are important too. If you played a player who hit 10 more homeruns than Belanger but only made 200 put-outs, and 500 assists, while making 25 errors...do you know what that means? That means 107 opposing players got on base when they shouldn't have...that means your pitchers with a 3.50 ERA suddenly become pitchers with a 4.50 ERA. It's a big deal! Defensive stats are a very big deal.

Weaver never took this guy out of the lineup. In 1974, the year Belanger made 243 putouts and threw out 552 runners whilst only making 13 errors...Weaver had two infield prospects on the bench, thirdbasman Enos Cabel and power hitting prospect Doug DeCinces. You didn't see Weaver pushing Belanger out of his spot to get one of these rookies to take over. Why? Because Cabel was 6 foot 5 with hands of stone and DeCinces (though becoming a 30 homerun hitter for the Orioles) could not hack it at shortstop. It wasn't until Cal Ripken Jr. came that the Orioles found a player who could handle the position and hit (though Ripken was over-rated defensively).

Managers obsessed with getting power hitters into the lineup because of what they read in Weaver's ancient stratagems should take note of the Belanger Factor. These present day managers have 100% interpreted his divine texts WRONGLY (as such). They have misinterpreted the late Weaver's scriptures!

Fundamentals

Is this a God Damn?

What is the explanation as to why a fucking god damned team like the fucking god damned 2012 San Francisco Giants can win a fucking god damn World Series trophy without even having one longball hitting cock sucker like Terry Crowley on it? Easy...

Fundamentals.

And you know what? Every other country on earth knows that. Man, I read once that Ichiro Suzuki's dad pulled him out of high school so Ichiro could practice baseball 19 hours a day. That's fucking crazy, but that kid learned the tricks of the trade, that's for sure. Ichiro can do almost everything, he's a good fielder, good hitter, good baserunner, good bunter, has a good arm, and other qualities. He doesn't hit homers, but he's still a great player.

Honestly, I don't understand why Ichiro never added plate patience and walks to his game. That's what seperates him from the likes of Henderson, Raines, (and to a lesser extent Lofton). He could hit .350 but still only have a .380 OBP, which is odd. Anyway, this paragraph is neither here nor there. I just want to keep that picture of Terry Crowley in an Expos uniform in this article but I want to add a pic of Ichiro too...so I need to flesh out some text/words so it's not just two pictures right-god-damn-fucking-next-to-each-other. So yeah, Ichiro would be elite Henderson/Raines class if he learned to draw a walk (.365 career OBP? Not greatest of all time caliber).

I can see yer hair turnin' grey....

Seriously, though. Ichiro is a good example of the Japanese offensive template. It's all slap hitting, running, making the plays, and getting the job done. Offense isn't even the main aspect of Japanese style of baseball though...pitching and defense is of higher value and importance than offense.

Ichiro was the first position player to excel at the major league level, but there were many Japanese pitchers (Hideo Nomo, etc.) who were stars way before Ichiro was. Pitching is paramount to hitting over there, and with very good reason.

Your pitchers and defense have to make 27 outs per game. Meanwhile, your homerun hitters only have about 4 chances per game to hit a homerun and even a 40 homerun hitter only hits a homer every 4 games (162/40). Are you really going to place utmost importance on a player who adds a homerun every 4 games...or should you worry more about the 27 outs you have to make every single game? What about the 3 (out of 4) games where your star homerun hitter doesn't hit one out? Then what?

Most games are won with pitching, and sound defensive fundamentals....not longballs.

Conclusion

Will the Americans win this year's WBC? I don't know....but I think their love for longballs acts as a major hinderance to their overall chances though.

I understand that homeruns bring people to the park, but that doesn't explain why present-day managers are obsessed with homeruns too. Basically, word to the wise, when you read divine tomes from master tacticians of the past such as Weaver on Strategy you should not jump to conclusions. You must take all the verses into account whilst making your final-most interpretations of them and formulating your respective opinions on the subject matter.

MASTER TACTICIAN

Unfathomable Anabolic Cheating in the 100th Degree

Observing humans swing bats in the effort to hit leather balls effectively and having swung a few bats myself with the intention of launching leather spheres great distances, I have to agree with the notion that the Art of Hittin' is a skill more than a display of strength.

I see arguments on the internet that due to Hittin' being more of an art than a display of strength that players who used steroids should be allowed in the Hall of Fame. This is taking that argument to an extreme and that statement is not correct. To say that steroids do not improve the performance of a player is not correct by any stretch of that argument.

Mechanics of Hittin'

These are the skills a human needs in order to employ the Art of Hittin' effectively:

1. Hand-eye coordination
2. Bat Speed
3. Strength

The following factors are what determines how far the ball will go:

1. Location on bat the ball makes contact with ("sweet-zone" preferably)
2. Speed of swing (how fast the human swung the bat)
3. Weight of the bat  (all results show that heavier is not better)

With math, the factors can be synthesized to find the ideal conditions for hitting (relative to the hitting style of the individual player).

Weight of the bat can be thrown out as being important. The velocity of a batted ball will be increased off of a heavier bat, yet the loss of bat speed seems to be too high a price to pay in return. Every test from articles online seems to show that getting the bat to be lighter is to the advantage of the hitter. That's why "corked" bats have come under scrutiny over the years, it's considered cheating to make a bat super light but it's not considered cheating to use a 60+ ounce bat. Lighter is better, 100%. Being a muscular dude on steroids does not help you at all because swinging heavier bats is not very important overall.

Hand-eye coordination and the location the ball makes contact with on the bat go hand-in-hand. The hitter wants the ball to hit the "sweet-zone" of the barrel for optimum contact. This has nothing to do with muscles and strength but has everything to do with vision and coordination of the self.

So far it's looking like steroids wouldn't help a hitter at all, like people seem to be saying, but let's move on to bat-speed.

Bat Speed

Bat Speed is how fast the individual gets the bat through the box. This is really where physics comes into play. As mentioned above, getting a nice light bat to zip through the box lightning fast at an incoming pitch is where you generate the real velocity.

There's a lot of research online but I'm going to be mostly using this source for bat-speed physics: http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/batw8.html (to avoid citing like a million sources every five seconds)

Players in the majors these days are clocking bat speeds of over 100 miles per hour. Once a player has the fundamentals of hittin' under his belt (hand-eye, judging the strike zone, patience, etc.) it all boils down to bat speed. Players with fast swings can wait a split-second longer to judge whether it's a pitch they want to hit and when they apply the fast swing unto the ball at the sweet-zone ...the velocity of the ball will be determined mainly by the speed of the swing.

This is where your physique comes into play. Bat Speed is generated by a well-grounded and powerful lower body. You ever see Jeff Bagwell for instance? He kinda looked like he was taking a dump while sitting on a toilet while he batted. He was just focusing the power of his body into his legs to build up a tremendous center of gravity into his oncoming swing. Look at his hands in the clip I linked to ("taking a dump") they are mobile and loose, his hands and arms are meant to swiftly get through the box, all the power is generated from his legs, feet, and stomach.

That being said, do players with muscular builds focused on their lower half, generate faster swings? Yes. The question being brought up here is, would steroids increase bat speed? Yes!

From twigs to tree trunks. Thanks steroids!

Most people take steroids to get big arms and flex for chicks. We're used to associating steroids with big arms, and since people know that arms don't play a major role in a players swing, they conclude that steroids don't aid a hitter. You can't rush to conclusions though. Look at Barry Bonds' legs...they almost doubled in mass in 15 years. It's not his arms you should be thinking about...it's his legs!

More leg and lower body mass will generate faster swings. That's a proven fact, steroids without a doubt effects the physical aspects of a human's lower body.

Wait There's More

Humans have a natural cycle. They are born, they grow into adults, they hit their prime-time peaks, then they wither and die. That's life, bro.

In baseball, most players lose their shit at some point, all humans do. When you hit your mid-thirties you naturally lose your physical stature. Your hair starts to turn grey, your body starts feeling like lead, you have trouble getting out of bed after a long day's work. That's normal.

Well, unless you are on steroids. You can counter the effects of aging by juicing yourself up with artificial hormone tonics and anabolic elixirs. Let's look at Bonds' career stats now...

Remember I told you that ALL players decline in ability when they hit their mid-thirties? I guess Barry didn't feel like declining like a regular human. Barry instead felt like pumping so many chemicals into his body to bring him into overdrive and turn his decline years into....oh come on. If anyone on earth believes that chemicals didn't enhance this person's level of play, they are nuts. Who hits their prime-time peak at 36-37-38-39? No one.

Bonds was already a Hall of Famer thanks to his natural peak (when he still looked human at the ages of 27 to 32). When he pumped himself full of hazardous chemicals to get a second prime-peak when he should have been declining is absurd, those stats from 2000 to 2004 are absurd.

Are They really even Bad for You though?

The only thing possible to argue now in favor of steroids is an argument such as...

"So what if they made themselves into over-sized hitting machines. Steroids aren't even that bad for you. Good for them for taking them, I think they are good role models for every aspiring athlete who wants to win at all costs."

I don't agree with that at all. All drugs which alter the physiological balances of your body must be used with caution. Drugs can save lives and cure many ailments, but they are not danger-free...and they are by no means things you should use recreationally or to alter your body.

Here are some side-effects associated with steroid abuse:

1. Horrible acne
2. Reduced sperm production
3. Raisin balls/Raisin dick (your testicles or weiner start to look like dried up raisins)
4. Man breasts (altered hormone levels throw everything out of whack)
5. High blood pressure (your heart goes into overdrive to deal with your body)
6. Liver damage (like any other chemical that goes into your body, the liver has to clean it up)
7. Enlarged prostates (even in teenagers which no one ever thought they'd see)
8. Chicks can start looking and talking like dudes (again hormones go out of whack)
9. Aggression (roid rage, again due to hormones being out of whack)
10. Stunted growth in kids (let your body have it's growth cycle, don't interfere with it)

If you argue that it was a good idea for these guys to take steroids for the good of the game, you're not on the right path. Baseball players were my role models as kids and I feel that they probably play a similar role today. What kind of message is it to send kids that steroids are ok?

I don't know how many kids are messing with steroids, but honestly, you'd much rather have your kids messing with weed and beer than you would want them messing with these chems. Steroids will alter their normal growth patterns, throw their hormones out of whack, and cause a myriad of issues with teens.

Conclusion

I do not believe that anyone confirmed to be a steroid abuser should be in the baseball Hall of Fame.

If you think that steroids does not enhance a hitter's performance...you are incorrect. Steroids enhance a hitter's performance and postpone the natural cycle of aging.

If you think that steroids are good for you and think anyone who wants to should use them, then I do not agree with you at all. There's too many risks involved, and it sends a terrible message to young people. It really is not a good idea for young people (or anyone) to abuse these chemicals.

Steroids is not a miracle drug that makes you all-powerful and immortal...steroid abuse will ultimately catch up to you. The overdrive your putting on your heart to keep up with your roided-up physique will take a good 20 years off of your life. The overall mass of the body and heart problems are correlated. It's a curse more than a blessing to be a huge hunk of meat...your heart will not be able to sustain your body into the ages of 50, 60, and over.

The most important and vital tools in the human body are the brain and the heart...not the biceps and the cavs.

'Roids

Art Appreciation...the Art of Appreciatin' Art.

When I made the index page, I noticed that I mostly write about nonsense, politics, and baseball. The only article I ever wrote about the arts was this one.

So, how 'bout we appreciate some art for a change? In this appreciation we shall be examining two pieces from varying eras and attempt to appreciate them.

Defeat (aka "five across da lips!")
Artist: Augie Pagan (site)

Defeat (aka "five across the lips")

Aunt Esther has been defeated. What is defeat? It is much more than just losing. Defeat means you tried your hardest, gave it your all....but came up short.

Many viewers of Pagan's "Defeat" seem to identify Fred as the protagonist of the piece, yet this is not the case. The protagonist of the piece is Esther and you are supposed to identify with her as such.

You may have even looked at it yourself and said aloud or in your mind,

"Oh Ya! Fred finally got that old hag! Ka-Bam!"

If you said or thought that, then I must regrettably inform you that it is an inaccurate assessment and you are appreciating this art badly. Why? Take note of the expressions of the onlookers one by one (from left to right), their emotions are as follows...

Julio's Goat: Apprehension
Julio: Shock
Lamont: Horror
Rollo: Amazement
Grady: Horror

Julio's Shock and Rollo's Amazement are obviously just the tip of the iceberg. Even Julio's Goat, who is an animal with less cognitive ability than a human is obviously distraught over this situation. The real proof, however, lies in the eyes of Lamont and Grady.

Lamont and Grady were the closest to the combatants out of all the onlookers...and they are visibly Horrified by what has just transpired. Within their eyes we see the true story. Go ahead and try it...gaze first into Grady's eyes and then quickly follow by gazing into Lamont's eyes...

Did you see the story told by their eyes? No? Ok, I will help you out then...

Esther had demanded one day that Fred give a large donation to her home for troubled youth. Fred, angered by the query, outright refused. This caused Esther to refer to Fred as a "beedy-eyed heathen" and then a "fished-face turkey-eyed fool." Fred not one to take criticism well, retorted by calling Esther "ugly" and let her know that she "smelled bad". They continued to argue for several minutes until Lamont (of sound mind) interjected to provide a voice of reason to calm the situation down.

Lamont suggested they "kill two birds with one stone - so to speak" by raising money for the youth center and taking their aggressions out at the same time. He suggested they do this in the form of a charity boxing match. He suggested that they just take a few light fun punches at each other and sell tickets at 5 bucks a pop. Though reluctant at first, both parites (Fred and Esther) agreed.

Lamont planned the match out, kayfabe style, and instructed Esther to phantom-punch Fred in the 5th round. He instructed Fred to drop like a sack of potatoes when hit by the feigned attack.

When the fifth round approached, Fred forgot his cue and didn't fall when the phantom punch was deployed. Esther was angered by his forgetfulness and showed her anger by referring to Fred as a "Web-toed, bat-winged, donkey-faced suckah!" much to Fred's dismay. Fred didn't mind being called many things, yet being referred to as a "suckah" was one thing he did not like to be called, he thus let Esther know that it was indeed "on now."

Fred told Esther that he found her hair style to be off-putting and her breath to not be as pleasant as one would like. The kayfabe quickly wore off, and the first real attack with malice came at the hands of Esther who swung her purse with such ferocity that it solidly connected with Fred's right temple.

Esther wanted to knock that fished-eyed heathen to the ground for telling her that her hair style was off putting, and she fought him like a woman possessed. Even as the rounds progressed and she was showing signs of fatigue, she refused to give up and kept fighting with all her efforts.

From this point, you can probably fill in the rest of the story.

What emotion does Esther's eyes portray? Defeat.


The Annunciation of the Proton Streams
Artist: Argeoth Vindalew

Many Christian artists of the late 16th century wished to bring bible verses to life. Thousands of works were produced yet the above piece is rarely appreciated. This work by Vindalew is a verse of the bible brought to life through art. No longer was it just words on paper, but thanks to art, the verse was now a living and breathing entity. The verse the piece is based on is Romans 1:4:33,

And Jesus Christ our Lord was shown to be the Son of God when God powerfully raised him from the dead by means of the Holy Spirit. Through Christ, God has given us the privilege and authority to tell Gentiles everywhere what God has done for them, so that they will believe and obey him, bringing glory to his name.

Our Lord proclaimed that all non-believers shall perish. The townsfolk asked which among them would be saved, and Jesus proclaimed that none were without sin and ALL MUST DIE. Jesus told unto the Gentiles that Jesus the Traveler and Jesus the Destructor has finally arrived on earth and informed the Gentiles to choose the form of their destructor. The Demon God began sucking the life out of the townsfolk to rob them of their blood.

Unable to accept assured mutual arbitrary demise, four noble Gentiles confronted the demon sent from hell and saved mankind by unleashing 400 metric tons of nuclear proton pressure unto the demon.

Upon promptly sealing him in a portable containment unit of striped black and yellow metal...the noble Gentiles told unto the townsfolk that they..."Loved [this] Town!!!!!"

Cue the Music!!!!  -(Romans 1:4:33)

Wow, this guy Romans was a pretty good writer, no wonder the artist wanted to bring this verse to life. Ghosts, Gods, Demons, Death, and those four noble saviors? Dang, Romans sure knew how to tell a good story.

I gotta re-read the bible, I love a good old fashioned yarn about death and suffering and shit like that.

Art depicting the 4 Nobles who busted the demon have continued throughout history, I will now leave you with some choice pieces, in hopes that you are left edified by them.

Here we find the Ancient Mariner and his harpooned shark returning to the land of the living...thankfully the Heroic Egon was there to bust it.

Many are familiar with this iconic work from the Aldini period. This one is particularly edifying.

And so, thus concludes another look at artistic creations throughout the eras. I hope you did some appreciation and enjoyed an art or two.

We appreciated two pieces. The former, a painting which brought out words from art...and the latter which brought out art from words.