Mathematics After The Fall

Archive for the ‘Mass Media’ Category

Birthdays, Logistics, and Deathdays

I had my birthday on Thursday, another one, for which I’m thankful. (Thanks for the messages.) If I hadn’t, this piece wouldn’t be written. I’m not yet ready for death. Someone found it strange that one of my common morning prayers is Thank You for the day, even the ones with a futile meeting and two classes and homework to grade. Yes, even the mediocre hand scribbled, copied, piles of homework.

As I woke up for my birthday, people were dying. They always are. Sometimes it’s massive and sudden. For instance, did the people of Port-au-Prince think about an earthquake two weeks ago? Likely not. There is no possible way to bring relief quickly enough. PAP airport has one runway, space for about a dozen planes, and no normal tower. From less than 20 daily planes, it now handles 140.

It doesn’t surprise me that people have complained from afar. It’s the French way. Occupation? Why would the US want to invade Haiti? Seriously? What would we want? I’m also angry with people like this
Huffington Post idiot who somehow imagines that logistics happen. Looking at his biography explains things. He’s worked as a policy analyst, not on the ground!
He has a degree in Economics, where people believe that men are rational and the market is efficient! We’d be better off listening to George Clooney, who has shown how to organize something. And we’d be better off reducing the number of reporters and government leaders. Quit talking and transport water filters and Plumpy’nut!

Haiti is an example of terror and death. Maybe it will improve American preparation. I’m checking my supplies. Today I recharged my powerpack. I have a water filter- do you? – but my stock of prepared liquids are a little low right now, so I’ll add another case of water. Stuff like that.

At the same time as the large events, I don’t want to neglect simpler deathdays. Again, as I awoke Thursday, one of my former students was on the road. Maybe she was in a hurry to get to a 9:25 class. Noel crashed, and as this short Courier-Journal article notes, she died.

I had Noel in the fall for Math 200. Though she and her buddies were not particularly enthusiastic about statistics, she was pleasant in our interactions. And I know she was happy with the grade she earned. I remember her jeans. Apparently, now ripping the knees out of jeans is somewhat fashionable. I never understood why people would want to look sloppy and poor, but some do, like Noel did. I wouldn’t call Noel the most memorable student I had. She wasn’t. She was one of many stories. Now, on this earth, she’s no more.

There will be some memorial at Bellarmine, which I’ll likely attend. As with Haiti, maybe this will spur people to individual action. We’ll appreciate our birthday mornings, and all the other mornings, a little bit more. Maybe my Thank You prayers will be a little longer. Eventually, they’ll run out, just I hope not yet.

Harvard Beats Yale 14-10: A blog

College football, or should I really say minor league football, has a lot of problems. Fortunately, I went to a university that does not award athletic scholarships. That school, Fair Harvard, is facing its rival today. Like last year, I’m not attending; instead I’m blogging while watching Versus. This will include commentary on The Game, as well as college football. Here we go.

• It’s good to see that Harvard and Yale understand the singularity of the word Captain, unlike the NFL. The Yale Bowl looks surprisingly clean today; they must have chased out the vermin and washed off the graffiti. Seriously, Yale Bowl is really nice. The field is dug out, so you enters through a tunnel, and break out into the middle rows. I think it’s prettier than traditional Harvard stadium. That said, I am not restrained from teasing.
• The front of Yale’s helmets say Yale. For some reason, the front of Harvard’s helmets say Crimson. I wonder if this was true back in the day. Of course, back then there weren’t helmets. And there were many, many more deaths. In 1905, 18 young men died playing the game. Nowadays, if ONE person dies it becomes a major event, with lawsuits and everything. Having double digit deaths would be inconceivable.
• 7:18 remaining, 1st quarter: Harvard’s quarterback is stripped of the football, and Yale recovers. Having scored a field goal the first time, Yale has the ball in Harvard territory again. (Some comments will actually refer to the game.)
• The color commentator is from Princeton. I like him. Here’s a quote – “If there was a betting line on this game in Wall Street between the Harvard and Yale guys …” Actually, Harvard was favored by 6 1/2 points. But it doesn’t look good, as Yale goes ahead 10 to 0. To make things even worse, Harvard drops the kickoff and must start around its 5.

Let’s examine other college football news for a bit. Apparently, Kansas football coach Mark Mangino motivates his players with quotes like this: “He wanted to be a lawyer,” Brown said in a telephone interview from his home in St. Louis. “He messed up, and Mangino said to his face, in front of everybody, ‘You want to be a lawyer? You’re going to be an alcoholic just like your dad.’ ” Great, eh? Mr. Mangino makes $2,300,000 a year to be a bastard like that.

• Harvard mounts a drive, and decides to go for it on 4th and 11 from Yale’s 24. In the NFL, this is not the optimal option, but Harvard’s kicker is nowhere near as good. The pass fails. On offense, Yale tries a double pass, but it’s an Ivy League moment. The first lateral is dropped, leading to a very humorous second pass. There will be several more messes like this.
• The Yale kicker crushes a punt. From where he kicks it, the ball travels over 80 yards. Did the scientists concoct something?
• Harvard runs a shotgun spread offense this year. The quarterback is at full shotgun depth, 6 to 6 1/2 yards behind the center. The best known spread shotgun, Florida with Tim Tebow, sets the quarterback at 5 yards. This may not seem like much, but it changes the focus. In both offenses, the running back is about 5 1/2 yards behind the line. In Harvard’s offense, the running back is in FRONT of the quarterback. This is better for passing. In Florida’s offense, the running back is BEHIND the quarterback, better for running. Given the rushing play calls today, the Florida formation would be better.
• 6:41 2nd quarter: Harvard advances to the 12 yard line. On fourth down, the Crimson attempt a fake field goal. It almost works. The receiver is open, but a charging lineman tips the pass. Sigh. The man – Yale #32 – has a giant wrapped cast on his hand. I didn’t think that was legal. It’s extra blocking power, though he hit the pass with his other arm. I guess it’s OK, though it seems like typical Yale nefariousness.
• 5:10 2nd quarter: Yale runs a sneaky no-huddle quarterback sneak, gaining 9 yards. From this point forward, I see no need to continue adjectives like “sneaky” and “nefarious” for Yale. It goes without saying. On the next play, Yale tries a fake snap. That is more than sly; it’s a penalty.
• 3:15 2nd quarter: On the same drive, Yale goes for it on 4th and 1. Good for them! The statistician in me is happy, though the Bulldogs convert, which makes me more sad. Later, with 1:03 left, Yale attempts another 4th and 1. Hey – they put a Y on the football! It’s a fullback dive, which is a play I respect in that situation. A quarterback can’t get a good start, but a fullback gets a two step running lead. Of course, the fullback fumbles the ball. It’s the Ivy League.
• Yale ends the half with a failed 63 yard field goal attempt. The camera angles on Versus are really weird, again; they use a field level camera for an attempt in the air. The game doesn’t get a sideline reporter, so Yale’s coach, Tom Williams, grabs a headset for the halftime interview. He’s cool. I’m not supposed to like him! He’s having fun, and asks if the announcers are. Asked about the fourth downs, he replies that “We’re trying to win the football game.”

At halftime, “imagine the net worth in the Yale Bowl today.” It’s the only tailgate I’ve seen where people wear bow ties. Since it’s time for a break, let’s look at much less competent coaches.

Example 1: Notre Dame hosts USC on October 17. Notre Dame is down by 7, but driving with under a minute to go in the 4th quarter. It’s fourth down and 10 on the 29. The Notre Dame receiver breaks open, the quarterback throws well, and there’s a completion. There’s also a penalty, because the USC safety dove in and injured the receiver on the ground. Trainers rush onto the field, and the game is stopped.

Notre Dame’s head coach is Charlie Weis. Notre Dame pays him at least $600,000 a year, plus speaking fees and endorsements. If the online compilations are true, Mr. Weis gets total compensation of roughly $4,200,000 per year. The total cost of attendance of all 83 Notre Dame football scholarships is $4,257,900.

Mr. Weis should know that according to the official football rules, FREE in PDF form, the clock will start on the referee’s signal. It’s Rule 3-3-2-e on page 70. Given the length of the injury break, Notre Dame should be ready to snap the ball quickly. Instead, after the clock started, the offense huddled, taking about 15 seconds to get to the line. A few plays later, time expired after 3rd down, with Notre Dame 4 yards away. Really, the clock easily could have expired after 2nd down, but Notre Dame threw a quick pass and got a break. By poor coaching, Notre Dame lost a down and before that had to run a fast developing play that didn’t even throw to the end zone. Maybe the players don’t convert, but the coaches didn’t even give them a chance.

Example 2: USC at Ohio State, September 12. Mr. Jim Tressel coaches the Ohio State University. Mr. Tressel gets around $3,000,000 annually to make optimal decisions. Plus he keeps a job at Ohio State if he wants, even if he steps down. He has tenure!
After this game, ESPN showed video where he actually got questioned about some choices, like kicking a field goal at the 2 yard line instead of trying for a score. “I think your percent chance of making fourth-and-2 probably doesn’t weigh as well as getting your three points,” he said. What does that say about his offense? Also, he’s wrong probabilistically. Quite wrong.

In addition to bad statistics, I want to point out a key play, with 1:14 remaining and USC driving. On earlier short yardage plays, USC has used a quarterback sneak. The way to make that more difficult is to place people on the line. For third and 1 on the Ohio State 5, how many players does Mr. Tressel put near the ball? Five? Six? No. Two. The ESPN link has the play, about 2:40 into the highlight. Unsurprisingly, USC gets the key yard. These types of errors are faults of the coach. I wish I could make tenure with a performance this lousy, as this much smarter commentator deconstructs.

The Harvard coach, Tim Murphy, is not as amusing in his interview. He’s right, though; Harvard needs to convert near the end zone. Let’s get back to the second half.

• Harvard receives the kick and begins to drive. Against Harvard’s spread, Yale’s using primarily a 3-3-5, with three linemen and three linebackers a few yards back. This is good for running, since Harvard has five linemen and a tight end that can block. Unsurprisingly, most of the plays are successful runs.
• 9:25 3rd quarter: On 3rd down and 2 on the 8, the quarterback audibles to a handoff. He had a better option, though; he could have thrown a pop pass to the second receiver, who was uncovered. At least the run converted.
• 7:40 3rd quarter: Yale adds more linemen closer to the goal line, leading to 3rd and goal from the 1. For some reason, Harvard goes under center and tries a running option. Nothing happens. Coach Murphy then calls time out to think of a play, but it’s a stupid one. Instead of the spread option, Harvard runs an tight I formation with the quarterback under center. An off tackle run fails.
  Why was this stupid? Because it allows Yale to win the numbers game. Even the Princeton man is smart enough critique this call. In this formation, the quarterback is not going to block, nor the ballcarrier. That leaves 8 Harvard blockers (+1 receiver) against 10 Yale defenders (+1 cover back). Harvard ran to the strong side, which is 5 against 6. The other side is 3 against 4. All the Yale people had to do is stand put, and let the extra player make the tackle. They succeeded. As an alternative, look at the Florida spread. With three receivers out, and the quarterback as a serious threat to run, the potential 7 (+ ballcarrier) against 8. One of the two sides will not have an extra defender. Going that way with successful blocks means a touchdown. That’s preferred.
• 5:08 3rd quarter: So far, the Yale staff is winning the coaching battle, and thus the scoreboard battle. They’re not completely winning, though. A strange punt formation leads to a delay of game and a 5 yard penalty.
• 15:00 4th quarter: Yale goes again on 4th down and 1. The referee examines the spot carefully and gives them the first down. After an injury timeout later in the drive, Yale makes a curious decision. As I mentioned above, the clock restarts after the injury, with a 25 second play clock. Ahead by 10, Yale wants to clock to expire, yet they snap the ball after only seven seconds. On the next play, after another injury break, Yale snaps after about 6 seconds. They failed to run off about 30 seconds here. While it likely won’t matter, it’s still a mistake. Oh yes, Yale missed the short field goal, too.
• They showed footage of Quidditch! Bellarmine needs a Quidditch team! Unfortunately, Slytherin won.
• Yale #10 makes a spectacular hit on a failed jet sweep, as the lead back failed to block him. Unfortunately, he verbally taunts the Harvard player on the ground (watch his head movements). Then, he decides to taunt Harvard receiver #85. Sadly, the officials do not call a penalty. This isn’t Kansas! To the Yale coach’s credit, I do not see Yale #10 on the field for the next play.
• 7:50 4th quarter: Harvard calls a draw on a desperate 4th and 4. Fortunately, Harvard #22 makes a video game spin-a-rama to get the first down. Two plays later, it’s an Ivy League moment. The snap rolls on the ground to the quarterback, who calmly picks it up and fires a long touchdown pass. Yale 10, Harvard 7. Wow! The camera finds two cute Harvard coeds! Wow! I like the sweatshirt: No one ever says, I want to go to Yale when I grow up.
• 2:40 4th quarter: Into a slight breeze, Yale tries a fake punt. This is not unusual, except that they had 22 yards to go. It’s a really cool play, a direct snap end around. Almost everyone was fooled. Fortunately, despite a slip, Harvard #27 recovers, and Yale winds up 6 yards short. The problem with this play is that at 22 yards, the returner will be able to race up to defend. Therefore, you need to assign someone to block him. Yale did, the kicker. That means, though, that there’s a free man, 9 (+ballcarrier) against 10. Somebody has to get fooled. Harvard was not trying for a block, so the linebacker was able to get there. Overall, this was like a 16 yard punt. That’s not very good.
• 1:34 4th quarter: Despite poor footwork on the throw, the Harvard quarterback makes the completion to Harvard’s wideout, who beat the cornerback on a post route. It’s 13-10. Harvard fumbles the point after attempt, in an Ivy League moment, but one Yale man was offsides. With another chance, Harvard converts for the 4 point lead.
• At least Yale didn’t waste those 30 seconds earlier, with about 90 seconds and three timeouts and 80 yards to go. Yale begins their drive. After two completions, the quarterback is hit on a throw! It’s an interception! And Harvard #45 is smart enough to fall down and prevent a fumble!
• Harvard does something smart by running two spread runs that take extra time, but not three. A first down was always unlikely. With 38 seconds left, Harvard must punt. Yale brings all 11 people to the line, which is a mistake. I’ll explain why in a bit. The line holds, and the kick is away. Harvard lets the ball die, and the officials stop the clock. The Princeton man commentator commends Harvard for not picking up the ball. He’s right about that, but there’s a better option. Harvard can bat the ball around as much as they want. It’s a violation, not a penalty, Rule 6-2-3-2-a on page 89 says that Yale just gets the ball at the best possible spot. Harvard ran off 3 seconds by not picking the ball up, but they could have had more by batting the ball across the field. If a Yale player didn’t come to pick it up, Harvard conceivably could have run out the clock.
  The problem with football is that people don’t think about these situations. Yes, Yale gets the ball at the 8, with 25 seconds left. Win Probability is High. But Harvard could have made Win Probability even higher! I wonder if those multi-million dollar coaches, like Mr. Mangino, Weis, and Tressel, have thought about that.
• After a sack and a spike, a crazy two-lateral play ends in a Harvard recovery, Crimson storms the field. Though I’m sure Mr. Williams will be pilloried for his 4th and 22 choice, and I agree that it was a suboptimal call, the commentators are correct – it’s not just one bad choice.

Thus ends another football blog. Though it was dicey, Fair Harvard has triumphed. Since my testosterone levels should be elevated now, I think it’s time for the gym.

The Office of the President

After a summer full of town hall yelling and assault rifle protests, last night we finally reached the point where an elected representative decided to act like a five year old who can’t find a toy. As you likely know,
Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina made an excited utterance during President Obama’s speech last night. He apologized, and President Obama accepted.

Looking through the commentary, most bemoan a declining civility in public life. Some are more interesting, like a reminder of today’s Morning Psalter, 1 Peter 4:8-11, over at Vox Nova. Others, with a sense of history, have pointed out Preston Brooks, another South Carolinian who beat a fellow Senator with a cane inside the Senate chamber.

The problem, I think, is that we have fused the individual with the office. For instance, earlier this week President Obama gave a speech designed for schoolchildren. Some people demanded an alternative to listening to the speech, fearing socialist indoctrination. A great response was provided by two Forbes columnists. Despite disagreeing on policy, they liked the idea and the speech. As they wrote, “Personally, we believe that our children should learn to respect and honor the Office of the President of the United States of America–no matter who sits in that office or what their politics are.”

During my undergraduate days, I had a conversation with a conservative, not too fond of President Clinton at the time. There was some talk around campus about verbally disrupting a Presidential appearance. He was unhappy at the idea of disruption. Maybe before, maybe after, but during would be wrong. The fact that he led us meant he deserved respect, despite his seemingly wrong policies.

That was very good counsel, which I remembered through the years of George W. Bush. If I had the opportunity to meet him in person, I would do so. I would greet him politely. If he asked me to help the nation, I would. Even an sketchy-serving drunk driving idiot deserves that, not because of him, because of the office.

And I’m reminded of the Medal of Honor. As the highest award available for American military service, any recipient deserves respect. Military conduct strongly suggests that a recipient be saluted first, regardless of rank. This poses a quandary, because a higher ranking militarist should not salute someone lower. How does this get solved? Technically, the general or whoever does not salute the person; he or she salutes the medal.

That’s the proper solution; no matter the person, the rank is still there. I have respected the Office of the President, and will respect it in the future. Even if it was someone reprehensible. Since Representative Wilson served in the Army National Guard, one would think he knew about decorum. Maybe that just got lost, like a toy.

Eurovision 2009

I was listening to the BBC World Service tonight while reading. They ran a little segment on the very popular Eurovision song contest. One of the great things about modern life is that I can quickly see most of the videos, thanks to Youtube. So I took a gander. I’ll include a few links. As a warning, none of the songs are lewd, but some of the Youtube comments are. Such is unmoderated life.

Eurovision songs tend towards high energy pop numbers. For instance, the third and fourth place songs, from Azerbaijan and Turkey, are clear pop songs with light lyrics, female dancers, and a very attractive female singer. Not that I mind, but these aren’t that memorable.

Another interesting fact is that English is the most common language. 19 of the 25 songs in the final included some English, including the top 5. The Internet and economics have made a difference. There can even be controversy about lyrics, as with the Georgian selection, We Don’t Wanna Put In. A little accent work makes that Russian czar Vladimir Putin. Russia, as host, was not happy, and the Georgians got tossed.

A little more interesting are the other three Top 5 songs. After finishing last in 2008, the UK went with an Andrew Lloyd Webber creation, sung by Jade. She sings well. I wonder what musical can use this song. Maybe a Disney animated feature? It’s nice.

More remarkable are the two victors. Second place went to Is It True? by the youthful songstress Yohanna. Her first album was at age 10, and her experience shows. It’s different. To American ears, this is a country-pop ballad that could immediately play on CMTV. I thought of Carrie Underwood as I listened. Look at these lyrics, from the chorus and bridge. They’re sad. Ouch!

Falling out of a perfect dream, coming out of the blue
Is it true? Is it over?
Did I throw it away?
Was it you?
Did you tell me you would never leave me this way?

Did I dream it?
Will I wake from this pain
Is it true? Is it over?
Baby did I throw it away?

The winner, in almost a rout, was Fairytale by the Norwegian Alexander Rybak. It’s a very good song from the 23 year old. He was born in the USSR, and moved to Norway with his musician parents at the age of 4. Yes, 1990, as the USSR broke apart. His violin skills and folk knowledge are both on display here. Admittedly, this is a pop song, but the dancers are male folk dancers, and it’s a little different. The lyrics are a little sadder. It adapts traditional folk songs to the 21st century pop world. I could see myself singing this at karaoke night.

I’m in love with a fairytale,
even though it hurts
‘Cause I don’t care if I lose my mind
I’m already cursed.

I’m not going to claim that the world will be changed by any of these songs. There’s no political meaning like We Shall Overcome. And there’s no repeated kicking like Hurt by Johnny Cash. There’s not supposed to be. That doesn’t take away from what it is; Eurovision 2009 isn’t going to solve Somalia or Kosovo. Not everything is.

Enchanted in a Cynical World

I’ve wanted to see the generally well regarded film Enchanted basically since it came out in 2007. It has had decent but not great reviews. I wondered why. Was it really a great film that critics could not appreciate? Was it a good film, justly rated? Or was it a mediocre film brought higher by people looking for any anti-cynicism?

The movie has finally reached Encore, one of the seemingly billions of digital cable channels that I get. Per usual, TiVo assisted me by recording a showing while I prepare exams for my students. As part of my post-grading funk reduction, I watched it last night. Overall, I agree with the reviews, as Enchanted is a good, not great, movie. Parts, like That’s How You Know, are great. The whole movie could be great. The fact that it fails is, I think, a reflection on our current culture.

I don’t want to be overly harsh here, because this movie gets a lot of things right. It begins at the beginning, with glorious 2D hand drawn animation. Sure, Pixar makes wonderful films; WALL-E might have been the best feature shown in theatres last year. They’re great at computer animation, which is different. Computer animation is the realm of imaginary fantasy. It’s not appropriate for fairy tales, which come from storybooks. Traditional animation was needed here, and I’m glad that Disney reversed its crazy decision to abandon cells for this film.

Another nice touch is the use of last names. Animated characters, like Giselle, don’t have any. The father and daughter, who interact heavily, do get a surname, but it’s Philip, another first name. Only the fully real character of Nancy Tremaine has a typical second name, but that is the family name of Cinderella’s stepmother. It retains a fantasy connection, as does much of the movie. For instance, the pigeons bring Giselle her towel after the magical shower.

Then, there’s Giselle. She carries the movie. Yes, Amy Adams is very pretty, but there are lots of pretty actresses. Ms. Adams does well because she understands the princess role. She needs to be naive, but not stupid. Inexperienced and trusting are the right way to play the character. She understands trouble, like the troll, and evil; she’s seen them, and had to escape. But for her, goodness is the natural state of affairs, so these are anomalies; she’s the anti-Leviathan. Any note of cynicism from her would poison the movie, worse than a poisoned apple. I’m glad that Giselle has none of that.

On the other hand, the writers want to make sure we know that the real world is Hobbesian. Apparently, the original draft of this movie had Giselle landing at a bachelor party. While the writers came to their senses, eventually, there are still unneeded crass moments. One is when leading man Robert’s current girlfriend of five years enters one morning. Thanks to slapstick, towel wearing Giselle has fallen onto Robert. As part of her reaction, the girlfriend rants “how I never stay the night, because Morgan is here and you have to maintain some boundries … ” Does she have to say that? Imply more than kissing? No. Sight would have been sufficient. By doing so, the writers felt a need to be cynical. There are a few other needless cynical words.

The biggest statement about the modern era is made through Giselle’s dresses. As Giselle progresses throughout the film, her dresses change. The first is the wedding dress, which is monstrous. As she goes through, supposedly apparel makes her more realistic. So, in the key scene, the Kings and Queens Ball, what does she wear? A gorgeous queen dress? No. A formfitting purple halter gown.

It’s not the worst dress in the movie – the wedding dress is viciously over the top – but there are five better ones. In particular, the second dress, the blue curtain dress, is much prettier than the purple ball dress. Online voters agree. Also, why would she purchase that dress? It’s out of place at a classic ball. Having Morgan, the daughter, help her in the emergency is completely appropriate. It’s sweet. Then, for some reason they buy and buy and buy. The emphasis on shopping, bags, hair, and makeup is not necessary. Was Giselle not gorgeous before “the real world fashion” took hold? (She was; caring for others is beautiful.) This scene serves just to funnel us from Andalasia to Sex and the City.

The ending, well, has some holes. Like moments before, it feels like it was written by people who don’t understand joy. They are trapped in the cynical, sly modern age of Carrie and Samantha. They’re afraid to pull the trigger, to be fully committed to the transformative power of love. That’s a shame. I’m don’t agree with the quote about true love’s kiss – “it’s the most powerful thing in the world”. (Right now, one could argue for H1N1 influenza.) Still, it has more power than is shown here. It seems our society has lost that power. As I finished this movie, I wondered if Snow White could have been made today. Given that the feature awarded Best Picture of 2008, Slumdog Millionaire, began with a scene where a young boy falls into fecal matter, and some in the audience laughed, I worry about that.

Maybe those that are married know about the power. Or maybe, more likely, divorce rates indicate that it’s lost. We need more Giselles in the world. Where is that portal to Andalacia, anyway?

Counterinsurgency at the Super Bowl

I’m watching the Super Bowl, with a team with history and pride against a bunch of transients in the desert. The NFL understands today’s America, blue and red parts, as the numbers suggest. For instance, they had a smart promotion with Samsung, offering online gift cards for purchasing new HDTVs. First, they were smart enough to partner with a high quality manufacturer. Second, they allowed any store to benefit. Third, they advertised well. While I was going to purchase a Samsung anyway, the promotion encouraged me to select a slightly larger model.
I talk about this not because I want to praise the NFL, or brag about my Samsung HDTV. Though, the TV is really nice, and watching Super Bowl HD is like watching a little movie. I mention this plan because it shows that logical thought has results. Another example of that involves the person the NFL chose to flip the coin. He gots lots of applause, this man, who showed logical thought and results. I mean General David Petraeus. One of his books is on my bookshelf, the US Army Counterinsurgency Field Manual. It’s one of my more unusual purchases, which by the standards of my bookcase is saying something. (I bought a copy, but it’s available online for free via the link. I paid because I think it’s a cool title to have on a bookshelf.) Rating it is hard, because there are parts that don’t matter to the general population. I’m going to award it a 3 out of 5, a quality book. I recommend it to people interested in studying leadership and duty.

[Completely non-live Super Bowl update: Wow! Things looked bad for Pittsburgh at the end of the first half, after the tipped interception. Then, the defense had a good setup and made a play. If you watch Pittsburgh's interception, you can see Mr. Harrison make a logical decision. He looks in at the running back, notices him blocking, then retreats into coverage. Also, as to be expected from a state that elects men who promote quasi-legal prisoner abuse, the Arizona receivers attempted a quasi-legal pick on the play. Plus the Cardinals got called for a personal foul. During the halftime show, Mr. Springsteen finished his set with Glory Days, which sort of critiques sports halcyonity. I like his style.]

Why do I want to talk about leadership and duty using this book? Well, the military knows about this. Really, they know much, much more than non-military people in general, and the last government in particular. There’s an entire chapter on leadership and ethics, and and appendix on a Guide for Action. Even if you, gentle reader, are not planning to lead counterinsurgency operations (and I suspect everyone reading is not planning this), I recommend this section. It begins with the first sentence of Section 7-1, “Army and Marine Corps leaders are expected to act ethically and in accordance with shared national values and Constitutional principles, which are reflected in the law and military oaths of service.” There’s not a lot of ambiguity there; it’s an expectation.

Furthermore, leaders must work to establish ethical culture. They educate and train. They must maintain the moral high ground. This quote from Section 7-11 is extremely powerful: “Army and Marine Corps leaders emphasize on the battlefield the principles of honor and morality are inextricably linked.” Wow.

There’s a lot of this book that does not cover honor, leadership, or ethics, and I can’t recommend. That’s not for most people. Even for those interested, I’d suggest the free version, in general, unless you think it’s good on a bookshelf like me. Either way, it’s nice to see people have smart plans.

Oh yeah – the good guys in black and gold won, too. I reset the time clock on this to when most of the post was written, during the game.

Semi-live Blog: Yale vs Harvard

I’m at home, working on many things this Saturday. To my joy, it turns out that I can watch the football game betwen the source of goodness, Harvard, versus the embodiment of evil known as Yale. Before I go on, I should mention that the preceding link does take you to Yale’s website. I don’t hate Yale at all; it’s just a rival. Just remember that Yale sucks.

Instead of repeating more episodes of WEC WrekCage and North American Hunter, the Versus network has decided to double their per viewer income by showing the contest. I have it on TiVo and will make a semi-live blog today as I work. For those of you who are going to go back and watch the game again, and would like to match the comments to actual times in the game, I’ll include the time that things happened live.

• 12:06 PM Eastern: It’s the 125th time that Yale and Harvard have met for football. In this opening shot, I think Mather House, my undergraduate residence and horrible Brutalist architecture, in the picture. It doesn’t have a cute bell tower.
• 12:11: One fun thing about Ivy League football is that because the players are not as good as minor league football (excuse me, BCS “college” football), random events can occur. For instance, on the opening kickoff, the two Harvard return men run into each other and the ballcarrier falls down at the 4 yard line. The refrain here is that it’s the Ivy League. You’ll see this often.
• 12:20: Harvard drives but has to punt. The punt hits a Yale Bulldog on the back foot and Harvard recovers. It’s the Ivy League. I am embarrassed, however, that the TV shows a shot of a Harvard fan with a profane statement involving Yale for about three seconds. That’s not what a Harvard gentleman should ever say. Besides, one would likely get an STI if one tried that.
• 12:22: From the turnover, Harvard scores the first of what will likely be many touchdowns. The Yale cheerleaders turn quiet. Did you know that George W. Bush was a cheerleader at Andover and Yale? The head football cheerleader, according to the Washington Post. Maybe less confusion about his “manliness” would have meant no stupid war in Iraq, or Mission Accomplished banner, or … who knows?
• 12:26: Showing superior intelligence, as we all know, Harvard surprises Yale with an onside kick. Harvard gets another offensive possession.
• 12:33: The Harvard kicker misses a 33 yard field goal attempt. Harvard Stadium is very close to the Charles River, and the winds can get nasty in November. Playing Ultimate Frisbee in November next to the stadium was often an wind festival. Still, that’s not good.
• 12:48: Harvard throws a short pass, but the receiver fumbles the ball. It flies 11 yards backwards before going out of bounds. It’s the Ivy League.
• 13:01: Yale misses a 19 yard field goal. That was ugly. The wind is just nasty.
• 13:03: The TIAA-CREF student athlete of the game is a real student, Casey Gerald from Yale. He had his Rhodes Scholarship interview yesterday, and made it back in time for the game. This is good. Also, I’m very pleased by the amount of coverage Myron Rolle of Florida State is receiving about his Rhodes finalist interview. At times like these, in my heart, I can pretend that academics matters to the NCAA and college sports folks.
• 13:17: Harvard gets stopped on a third down with about 45 seconds to go, and will have to attempt a field goal. Showing their intelligence, Yale does not call timeout to get another possession after the kick. (This is a bad move, by the way.) That attempt was hideous. The kicker planted far too far forward and hooked it badly. Wind played no role. At the half, the commentator says “it has been exciting, it has been unpredictable.” Of course, it’s the Ivy League. Harvard leads 7-0.
• 13:25: The Harvard Sports commercial is on, the public service bit. Most of these commercials feature an announcer and fast moving pictures. Here, let’s look at who Harvard uses: A Harvard women’s basketball player talking about the 16 over 1, a football player talking about 29-29, and a women’s hockey player about 1989 men’s hockey. Every word is spoken by a student. How innovative. How interesting. Players can speak full sentences. I feel smart. Then, the next commercial has guys about jumping into jeans. There went that.
• 13:31: Yale’s commercial uses a narrator, no real people, and shots of the campus. Showing Harvard superiority is like shooting fish in a barrel, really.
• 13:50: The officials make a mistake and rule a Harvard fumble, even though the quarterback’s knee was down. Yale recovers. It’s just another Yale nefarious technique, to be expected.
• 13:53: Yale does not score after its trick. It then has a 12 yard punt. Justice is restored.
• 14:00: One of the displays refers to the 1894 Harvard-Yale game as the Springfield Massacre. I found this description online. It was brutal, with a broken leg, major concussion, broken collarbone, crushed nose, 2 eye pokes, head injury, and fight. One player wound up in a coma. The article is adapted from The Only Game that Matters, a book on the history of the rivalry. I don’t own a copy, sadly. Hmm.
• 14:18: Some Yale undergraduates show “genius bordering on insanity” by going briefly shirtless on TV. No, this is basically full insanity. And just shirtless is going halfway. Chicago’s Polar Bear Run is the real deal.
• 14:21: Harvard’s kicker manages to make a field goal, leading to a likely insurmountable 10-0 lead for the Crimson.
• 14:38: Yale’s best play is the punt, getting the ball inside the Harvard 1. At this point, it’s 15:03 in real life, as I’ve been pausing. My mom calls me with the final result. I thank her for ruining the surprise. For you, well, we’ll see.
• 14:48: Yale’s best play occurs again, this time a return inside the Harvard 10. On fourth down at the Harvard 4, Yale shows its true intentions by committing a false start penalty. The fourth down pass is incomplete, but the officials call a pass interference penalty on Harvard. This is a correct call, and I’m saddened that the Harvard back would attempt to cheat. Likely it was just accidental. Of course, I’m not as sad as the spectator with profanity on his shirt. With new life, Yale attempts to pass, but there’s a fumble! The quarterback got hammered from behind and drops the ball. Harvard recovers.
• 14:58: Harvard makes a first down, which allows them to run out the clock. The victory formation ends the game. The final score is Forces of Good 10, Forces of Evil 0. So, in this month, Obama wins and Harvard wins. Things are looking up. The hills are alive with the sound of music. Too bad that final score isn’t in real life.
• 14:59: The teams line up for handshakes after the game. According to the commentators, this happens all the time in the Ivy League. The players have respect and class, of course. That fan in the stands is just an anomaly. After the game, fans and players mingle on the field. It’s an orderly storming.

So, that’s that. According to the studio, Yale had only 90 yards of offense. Harvard had 370. The margin was appropriate. More good events, eh?

Dancing with the Stars: Season 6 Final

Thankfully, the three best dancers made the final this season. As I did once before, I’ve decided to Tivo-blog the end of the show. One thing I should note is that I prefer ballroom to Latin. Latin styles tend to involve quick leg and hip action. Fairly tall people, like me at 6 foot 1, have trouble physically keeping the beat. It’s not coincidental that the better Latin dancers are shorter. On the other hand, the long flowing lines of ballroom are easier with height and stature. Plus, the ballroom dances have more elegance.

In the group cha-cha, each couple plays to their strengths. Christian and Cheryl stay mostly open, focusing on hips and slides. According to my estimate, they’re hand-in-hand facing each other for only about 20 seconds of their minute. For comparison, Jason and Edyta work in typical ballroom positions, hand-to-hand facing, for over 40 seconds. Instead of hip sway, they dance with a back sway and Jason’s athleticism. Kristi and Mark focus on Kristi, who is at least as athletic as Cheryl and Edyta; they’re hand-in-hand facing for about 30 seconds. Their show moves are spins, because an ice skater can spin like crazy.

After the individual minutes, the couples dance as a group. Jason misses a step, which Bruno catches, and he makes a little cringing smile. Christian has better musicality than Jason. Then again, even with two arms, Christian couldn’t make the final lift seem so simple. The word “Wow” came out of my mouth. Sure, you have two world-class athletes involved, but that doesn’t make it less gorgeous. At the end, they celebrate as a group. That’s one of the great things about this show. Because the judges serve as the foils, and because the contestants understand the purpose of competition, they are often happy for each other.

What is that purpose? Competition and athletics drive us to be better people. We learn strategy, discipline, practice, and teamwork. After the training, however, too many people think of winning as the goal, and self-improvement as the side effect. This is wrong. When playing card games, I used to say that my goal was to play a flawless game, and winning would be a side effect. Card games have random chance. Against someone of equal talent and preparation, my play can guarantee I don’t lose the game, but it will never guarantee victory. Sometimes good players lose. That’s not the point. It’s about what I can control. That difference, playing for effort and not result, made me a better player. And I did pretty well. Similarly, if I were dancing against Kristi, I would lose. She’s got more skill and experience. That doesn’t mean I shouldn’t try, or gain a great deal from the experience. Besides bringing partner dancing back, for which I am highly grateful, DwtS also puts competition in the proper context. No wonder I like it so much.

Anyway, it’s time for judge commentary. Len mentions Christian’s hips and Jason’s elegance (and agrees with me that he’s better in ballroom dances like the foxtrot), but calls Kristi the total package. Carrie Ann declares Kristi as the winner, hands down. I agree. She is both an athlete and an entertainer, while the two gentlemen are one but not the other. The judges give Christian 8, 9, and 9, for 26; Jason 8, 8, and 8, for 24; and Kristi 10, 10, and 10, for 30. That’s about right.The second half of the show is time for freestyle. Kristi and Mark do a highly technical motown dance, mambo and hip-hop. To give you some idea of the difficulty, Mark does an assisted backflip as the third or fourth toughest trick. There were a few minor timing errors; I noticed two on Kristi’s part. The judges award 10, 10, and 10, for another 30. I’m a little surprised; I thought Len would score a 9, because of the minor awkward moments.

Jason and Edyta dance to Will Smith’s Miami, which is a mistake. It’s a hip-hop song, not a ballroom number. Jason is a ballroom dancer. He can’t win with this, because Kristi is much better in open position dancing. A cabaret number would have been a better choice. They still could have the lifts, full overhead spinning lifts which were at least as good as Kristi and Mark’s. They still could have removed some clothes; as Bruno mentioned, it is like watching centerfolds. Overall, 9, 9, 9 is about right here. It wasn’t as good as the first pair on the ground.

Christian and Cheryl are the last pair; they choose meringue. Here, Christian’s arm injury is a severe disadvantage, because they’re limited to one handed lifts and moves. It’s not that their aerial action isn’t good; it is, but the other two couple are well, well ahead. A bigger problem is that they can’t perform any two-handed dance moves, which means that they’re limited in their turns and even their dancing positions. It’s a very good dance, and Cheryl choreographed it well. That said, in terms of dancing talent and aerial talent, Christian is nowhere near Kristi. He’s not even Jason, even though his scores of 9, 8, and 9 give him a total of 26 for this dance and 52 for the evening.

Going into the final, Kristi has 60, well ahead of the other two stars. She’s been the best and should win. Overall, Jason’s been better than Christian, particularly in the ballroom dances, so I think he should finish second. We shall see.

Dancing with the Stars: Season 6 Final Results

I fast-forward through the recap, so I started watching with Usher’s Love in This Club. Usher doesn’t get partner dance. His “partner” does the splits, and promenades around. They do a couple turns, but then he just watches. It’s almost predatory. She jumps into his arms. Later, the dancers do a side-by-side choreographed routine, without touching. Parts easily could have been hand-in-hand.

The third place couple is … Christian and Cheryl. As it should be. They receive a group hug and standing ovation. In what sport do semifinal losers get that kind of respect? Why don’t they? On Sunday, Pittsburgh defeated Philadelphia to advance to hockey’s Stanley Cup finals. Say after the handshake, the Philadelphia Flyers received applause from the crowd before the presentation of the conference trophy. It would be the talk of the nation. I’ve seen this happen at a Super 14 rugby final in the Southern Hemisphere. It was so classy. I wish Americans did that. Back on the show, the couple still gets to do their favorite dance, a paso doble to awesome paso music I want.

The recaps begin, with previously eliminated contestants. American Idol is on during the first hour, so there’s much filler here. As Adam Corolla states, this is why the Terrorists hate us. In the juniors, the best couple wins, the 13-and-unders. The boy Brandon gets his wish, as three Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders present the small mirror ball. After all the losers dance, Usher comes out for another group dance number. I like this one better, because he his song “Yeah” and made it a blues club number. He wears a classic white suit, and a couple dancers have fedoras. It’s appropriate for this show.

Finally, in the last half hour, the competition restarts. Kristi and Mark picked their jive. The jive bounces and spins, making it a smart choice. To no one’s surprise, it’s excellent. Kristi even recovers from getting her shoe caught in her pouffy skirt. They receive a deserved 10, 10, 10. Jason and Edyta chose the quickstep, a ballroom dance. Closed position and long leg movements are Jason’s strength. He’s also got good facial expressions here. It is their best dance of the season, in my opinion better than Kristi and Mark’s tonight. Anything less than their first 10, 10, 10 would be morally wrong. Fortunately, the show’s got a good heart. Jason is outwardly happy.

Overall, Kristi and Mark have been the best couple. They are the highest scoring team ever, and should win. After some more plugs, and another commercial break, it’s time for the mirror ball. The new champions are Kristi and Mark! Fireworks explode. Jason and Edyta are appropriately gracious. Confetti rains down. The champions are hoisted into the air. Now, if I could just get the hosts to end the show with “Keep On Dancing”… .

Women Deserve Better

Back in February, I received a personal invitation to view the rehearsal of a controversial event. No, I don’t mean the 2008 KYMAA math festival. I mean an event on Bellarmine’s campus that was held around 14 February. The stated purpose of the event is to raise funds and interest to fight violence against women, as stated on the web site. That particular link has no potentially offensive or vulgar terms, but other pages on that site do. I’m talking about something called V-Day, with V not for Violence or Valentine. Know what? I’d like to use actual terms, which are considered impolite, so I’ll send this beyond the more link. Click away if you wish.
(more…)