Personal & Nonsensical

life formulas

Life is not as simple as it seems.  Or maybe it isn’t as complicated as it seems.

Shit.

Maybe its both … at exactly the same time.

I cannot remember where I found all these awesome “life formulas” but I love the way they take complex life things and simplify them into basic equations (note: I apologize to the creator for not being able to source).

And in their incredibly obvious simplicity there is a nuanced complexity that makes you think about the truth they contain.

The first one I ever saw was the truth equation.

Truth. What I think happened divided by what really happened.

Brilliant.

It got to the core truth behind … well … truth. And it makes you wonder a little why there isn’t a class somewhere in maybe high school where they teach you stuff like this. Or at least make you think like this. It may seem silly at first glance but it is a really interesting exercise.

And back to truth?

What you think divided by what really happened.

By dividing it can equal, diminish what you think or actually be bigger by such a margin it actually marginalizes what you originally thought.

Awesome.

And when I see Life defined by formulas like this I begin to think about what makes 100%.

Well.

It actually made me begin by thinking about “giving 110%.” Which is actually kind of silly when you think about it.  Is it really possible to actually give more than 100%? <no>

And what the hell is more than 100%? (unless you are bionic you cannot answer that)

I do know as I think about this 110% thing it makes some want to bring one of these formulas along with me to a meeting and if someone suggests you to give over 100% (that infamous 110%) maybe I would force them to show us how to do just that mathematically.

When someone does say that … aren’t they really saying “give me 100% <because I know you are juggling things and I need you to focus on this>.”

So why can’t we just tell the truth and say “c’mon … its not extra effort … its just focus. Focus 100% on this.”  <albeit it doesn’t sound as inspiring or leader like or gung ho-ish … yeah … I just typed ‘ho-ish’>.

Anyway.

From there I actually began thinking about the whole 100% we are supposed to give in life.

100% is tricky. Is it defined by effort, focus, the best of our abilities or the best we can do <at that time>?

Whew. Now THERE are some choices for ya.

Life is a constant juggling game <or a balancing act>. There’s always balancing that needs to be done.  And there are always tradeoffs.

Ah.

But.

I think there is a difference between juggling and balancing.

Juggling is all about keeping track of a bunch of things … all up in the air.

Balancing is all about … well … balancing … evening things out.

It seems to me that is one is more controlled chaos-like <juggling> … and the other is a more prioritizing of actions <balancing>.

Wow. Makes me think of whether I am a juggler or a balancer. And that makes my head hurt.

Regardless.

Aw. Anyway <quit babbling Bruce>.

There is a simplicity that these formulas give us in thinking about life.

Disappointment being expectation divided by reality.

-          Which suggests it is our own inability to manage our expectations that create a sense of disappointment. Makes you think a little, huh?

Shock being expectation minus expectation.

-          The unequivocalness <that isn’t really a word> of this is brilliant.

Modern art being the belief you could do it plus the fact you didn’t.

-          The formula nicely builds, instead of divides or subtracts, to heighten the value

The slight cynicism built into diamonds being forever … balanced by whether you are a jewel thief (awesome)

Oh.

And obligation.

This one is fabulous.

Starts with do. Just the action itself. Add on “the right thing” so value increases by doing the right thing … and then plus or minus the amount of guilt.

Very very nice.

I actually see a great class session for young people somewhere in this life formula idea. The ability to simplify the challenges, the decisions, the actions in life into equations. It is a nice way to be able to point out some complex critical thinking in life.

In the end, while it may seem silly, I think it is a good and interesting exercise.

Particularly if you are juggling, or balancing, a bunch of crap and making so many judgment calls your head seem like it is going to explode … these simple formulas, in a really weird way, provide perspective.

Maybe you have an obligation to give this a shot if you feel overwhelmed with life.

Because maybe, in their simplicity, maybe you find more balance.

And that … I am pretty sure in my pea like brain … is a good thing.

why we have sex (typically) indoors

Well. Let’s chalk this one up as another example of “research has been done on everything.”

In addition to that … using research … every once in a while I like to enlighten people to some of the hazards in life so they can avoid them.

Here you go.

The hazard: Public sex can be extremely dangerous.

Oh.

The research: An Australian zoologist Darrell Kemp conducted a study that has confirmed the assumption that public sex can be dangerous to the lives of the lovers.

Ok.

I have to pause here.

“Confirmed the assumption.”

Huh? I never assumed having sex in public was dangerous … well … at least life endangering.

The study?  Studying the process of Sphex wasps hunting the Australian locust <now THAT was a blast to type> he discovered that those locusts “in love” were attacked by predators more frequently.

Good news for us guys?

Females were much less lucky than males.

While researchers agree that sex is a healthful and pleasant exercise <thank god they agree on that>, they also suggest that few are aware of the fact that sex can also be very dangerous.

Quote: “Many predators prefer to hunt for those who, forgetting everything in the world, are selflessly engaged in procreation”.

While many biologists agree with this statement, until now, nearly no one tried to calculate what percentage of those who have sex may be caught by predators.

So it was up to this guy named Kemp who finally decided to answer the question everyone has been asking … and assessed the risk of death during sex using numbers.

The objects of his study were representatives of the Australian locust (Chortoicetes terminifera) and preying on them … the local wasp Sphex cognatus <think of the locust as lovers of outdoor sex and the local wasp as a predator>.

Oh. This is important.

It should be noted that adult Sphex do not feed on locusts, as well as grasshoppers, mantises or stick insects. Like the Olympic gods, they are content with flower nectar.

They attack these insects only to feed their babies. Having noticed the victim, Sphex jumps on it, paralyzes it, and drags it into a hole where it will serve as food for the wasp larvae.

Whew.

Glad I cleared that up for everyone.

(note: if you see a Sphex … and it looks like it is going to jump … well … move – that’s a freebie …)

These Sphex hunters are most active in the beginning of the Australian summer (December), when the locust usually begins to gather in flocks. It is in these flocks where mass mating occurs <some people call this “an orgy”>.

Having conducted a series of experiments, the biologist noted that, while mating locusts accounted for approximately three percent of the total number, they were attacked first.

In contrast, single species rarely suffered from attacks of predators. And males were generally not attacked.

According to his calculations, in nine out of ten cases Sphex preferred to paralyze females, and only one in ten males. The predators are were apparently attracted by the larger size of female locusts.

Yowza.

I will withhold comments on that.

Ok.

This next part is beyond awesome.

At the same time, on several occasions the scientist has observed very curious circumstances occurring with males who were the most “passionate” lovers.

During Sphex attacks they, indulging in amorous pleasures, noticed nothing around them, including the fact that a wasp was dragging their paralyzed partners to its burrow.

“Noticed nothing around them.”

Awesome.

Ok. Here is where it gets important to us.

There is an assumption that once upon a time such danger existed for humans and because of this we inevitably decided to have sex in secluded and well protected places.

Yup. Some anthropologists believe that the search of solitude for love in people was caused by the presence of large predators nearby. Think about it <okay … don’t … I will explain>.

If chimpanzees living in the woods can quickly interrupt copulation and crawl up a tree, in the same environments our ancestor human folk just weren’t as nimble.

And there were no lack of predators. In the good ole days a large crowd of people <or a couple if you struggle envisioning a caveman/woman orgy> could attract lions, hyenas, saber-toothed tigers or other predators.

As a result, our ancestors began to look for more secluded places in order to procreate. This gradually led to the abandonment not only of public sex, but even open display of genitals. As a result, sex in Homo sapiens became the only “personal matter”, which is always done in a safe place – once again not to attract the attention of predators.

Whew.

I understand this post is disappointing to those seeking public sex.

But, in general, great advice.

canadian cheese

Figured I would start off on the right foot …

Knock Knock!

Who’s there?

Cheese!

Cheese who?

Cheese a cute girl!

Yup. This one is gonna be that bad. But I couldn’t resist. Oh. And please note the picture to the right … “say cheese” … ah … cheese humor. The best comedians in the world couldn’t make up stuff like this.

And, yes, I am really writing about Canadian cheese.

Well. Actually I am writing about what someone else wrote about Canadian cheese (just wanted to make sure no one thought I had completely lost it).

Anyway.

I was inspired by … uhmmmmmm … Canadian cheese (this isn’t a joke … this is serious shit in the world of cheese … think Vermont cheese … Wisconsin cheese … France and cheese … and … well … Canadian cheese!)

(yup … no shit).

So.

Let’s take a second about how I got inspired to write about Canadian cheese.

I met the person who wrote the ‘pocket guide to Canadian cheese’ while on a Caribbean island.

(oh … the people you can meet if you are sitting alone at a bar …)

Yup (again).

I was fascinated that someone had come to a Caribbean island to write a book about Canadian cheese. Let alone they had actually elected to write about cheese.

Oh.

But not any cheese.

Canadian cheese.

And the book is a pocket guide (sitting right next to “what to do on the island” and the island maps).

Ok.

All that said. Gosh. Where to begin?

Let’s begin at the beginning.

The foreword is titled “cheese and me.”

It is in this section where you are immediately profiled … because it sets the stage with ‘like elite cheesemongers’ (I would hate to meet a non-elite cheesemonger in a back alley) and a reference to the “cheese renaissance.”

First.

I feel compelled to talk about what it takes to be an elite cheesemonger.

I vaguely remember the Mongols were ‘mongers’ of something. But cheese? Well.  Oddly enough (and I am too lazy at the moment to research so this is from memory) I believe the Mongols put dairy products under their saddle to ferment it for future … well … eating.

Geez.

No wonder the Mongols kicked the shit out of everyone.  They were eating fermented horse saddle cuisine. Tasty stuff I am sure.

Sadly … I am not sure a Canadian has ever been in the Mongol category of mongers, therefore, they created their own segment of mongers … cheesemongers.

Ah. But, to be on the safe side, they become elite cheesemongers (I believe most of them have mansions in upper Newfoundland).

Anyway.

Being a cheesemonger is tougher than you think in Canada (I actually did some research).

This comes from the Cheese Lover blog:

I am amazed how fantastic Canadian cheese is – both the quality and the way chefs use it. This despite the fact that Canada, like the US, bans the production of young raw milk or unpasteurized cheeses. However many of the most interesting cheeses come from Quebec whose government has recently reversed that position to allow the sale of raw milk cheeses under the age of 60 days.

Cheesemakers in Ontario also labour under the additional handicap of not being free to choose the style of cheese they make. If they want to use cows’ milk (the restriction doesn’t apply to sheep and goats’) they must be able to prove to the province’s Dairy Farmers’ Association that no similar cheese is being made. Popular styles are on allocation so you can’t for example make a cheddar if the cheddar quota is already taken up.

Ok.

Seriously.

First … the cheddar quota is taken up ? … quotas on canadian cheese? Oh my. And Americans think their government is too involved?

Anyway. Second <and most importantly>. Someone writes a blog solely on cheese <must be a monger> … and knows about the cheese quota?

(by the way … I am still slightly stunned, and amused, there is a quota on cheddar cheese  … not just any cheese … cheddar cheese … what’s up with that).

Anyway.

Once you have gone through mongerer training (lots of gnashing of teeth and multiple meals of plain limburger sandwiches) you become an official cheese mongerer and probably become qualified to monger cheese and wear foam cheese hats and … well … write a pocket guide on cheese.

Next.

Just in case you may have missed it.  The Italian renaissance. The French renaissance. The Canadian cheese renaissance.

Eh?

(Its probably because they have the worlds nicest cheese that you didn’t even notice it)

But, no shit, in this pocket guide you are exposed to the Cheese Renaissance <no dates actually provided> and the Mona Lisa of Canadian cheese. Nope. I did not make that up.  Apparently this Mona Lisa has some kind of rind (and possibly the hint of a smile).

Moving on <quickly>.

Next.

The ladder of cheese appreciation.

Yup. They have a ladder.

And not a one rung ladder but rather one of those extendable ladders that can reach the roof of a three story house.

You gotta REALLY appreciate cheese to climb this frickin ladder.

Ok.

Next.

The raw milk question.

Ah.

The big question. Can raw milk be made in canada?

Can a woodchuck chuck wood?

Do Canadian geese shit?

Do moose make milk (I don’t know what a female moose is called … Moosette. Meese? … are any of the royal canadian mounties gay?)

Big important questions.

Next.

Soft washed rind cheese.

Ok.

Would anyone want to eat unwashed cheese? (rind or not).

Personally I am hoping canada has good personal hygiene and clean everything (not just their soft rind cheese). But I am pleased that whenever they wash their rind cheese they do it softly.

Next.

Firm Canadian cheese.<note: I am skipping any inappropriate jokes about firm cheese>

A quote from the pocket guide:

“Substantial dependable and honest – just like Canadians, eh?”

I cannot make this stuff up <I am not that good>.

I am not sure I can add to anything beyond this quote. It kind of says it all.

Ok.

Chapter 8.

Blue cheese.

“Don’t think just because you got your cheese to the curing room that the hard work is over. It’s not, you can still make a poxy whores melt of it. Imagine what would happen if even a single blue mould spore got into the Gold room? Total disaster even at that late stage in the proceedings. Blue mould in the right place is a gift from god but in the wrong place it spreads like cancer. “

Cmon. Priceless prose.

First.

example of a poxy whore

Poxy whores melt?

Dickens only dreamed of writing this about old England let alone blue cheese.

In fact.  I vaguely remember a line like this in Oliver (or porgy and bess) neither of which is Dickens … but has to count for something.

Second.

And flipping from a ‘gift from god’ to ‘cancer’ is hyperbole at its best (or worst).

Too much good stuff.

And whoda thunk it would be about canadian cheese? (not me)

So.

Having written about cheese, elite cheesmongers, cheese rind … I thought I would end on the challenges cheese creates for leadership:

“How can you govern a country with two hundred and forty six varieties of cheese?”Charles De Gaulle

Who would have thought cheese, from anywhere, could create so much discussion & thought.

let’s hit the ice

Here we go.

While most people will believe I have decided to write about ice hockey because the NHL playoffs are kicking off tonight … they would actually be wrong <although I will get to it>.

Turkmenistan has just announced it will create a hockey league.

Ice hockey may seem odd for a desert nation (temperatures can reach 50 degrees Celsius/120 degrees Fahrenheit) but, hey, America has hockey in glacial Phoenix and Tampa bay … so what the heck.

Yup.

This week Turkmenistan’s President Gurbanguli Berdymukhamedov has ordered the country, and the state departments themselves, to create a hockey league.

The best news? National newspaper ‘Neutral Turkmenistan’ reported that the police are already busy setting up their own team (note: if you are betting I would bet on them … oh … unless the military creates a team).

Alright. The NHL playoffs.

Let’s be clear.

Ice hockey has a challenge.

No one watches it. Ok. Not really ‘no one’ <note: an example of hyperbole to make a point> … but surely not a lot of someones.

Let me move to Exhibit 1.

So.

I admit.  Every time I see ice skating listed on TV schedule I wonder who the hell watches.

And who the hell at a network would schedule ice skating opposite a Heat – Bulls game (I say this as a follow up to the ‘who the hell watches ice skating’ earlier comment).

Well.

Interestingly one Sunday happened to be a “skating Sunday” and there was a Heat vs. Bulls game opposite.

Now.

While nothing had the same rating as the NBA game there were a variety of skating options on that day.

Option 1 – NHL all-Star game.

Option 2 – US Figure skating championships.

Option 3 <one network showing a wry sense of humor> … the movie Blades of Glory airing opposite the Figure Skating Championships.

Here is the nutty thing (the actual Exhibit 1 portion).

Option 1. NHL all star game gets a 1 household TV viewer rating.

Option 3. Blades of Glory gets a 1.7 household TV viewer rating.

Option 2. Figure Skating Championships gets a whopping 2.2 household TV viewer rating (2.7 in the second hour).

Yeah.

Not only did figure skating give the NHL an uppercut KO shot but frickin’ Blades of Glory gave it a good ole fashion whuppin’.

<note: once I found this out I immediately sent a sarcastic email to a buddy of mine who lives in Maine and is a die hard NHL fan only to get a ‘kiss my ass’ email in return>.

Ok.

Let me move on to Exhibit 2.

Because it isn’t like we haven’t had the opportunity to watch the NHL.

The NHL and NBC recently signed a 10-year television agreement which meant that aside from pre- and post-game shows, between NBC and Versus/NBC Sports Network, over 100 regular season games were shown. And beginning with these playoffs, every single matchup will be broadcast on the NBC family of networks and NHL Network. There’s not much more an ice hockey fan could ask for.

So, what’s my point in Exhibit 2?

See Exhibit 1.

Ok.

Because I am a solution sort of guy I thought maybe I could identify the issue.

Thanks to one of the best blogs in the entire universe, if not galaxy, http://50topmodels.wordpress.com/

<a blog that explores the great world of visualized thinking> I discovered a visualization for the issue that ice hockey has in the world of ‘capturing our attention.’

Ice Hockey 50topmodels site

As they say:  Due to a complex formula not all sports that are fun to play are equally fun to watch. Even the most hard-core free diver would never indulge in a, say, four hour live broadcast of his sport. Meanwhile, it can highly rewarding to watch The Strongest Man in The World Competition, even if the idea of carrying a truck tire is not very appealing. Interestingly enough is soccer, arguably the most popular sport of the world, fun to play, but boring to watch.

We racked our brains to come up with something that is, somewhat, easy to master and fun to watch: sex and dodge ball. Sometimes dancing and boxing, too.

(it is their image above)

Look.

I like ice hockey. For god’s sake I learned to skate on ice hockey skates (which, by the way, meant that any time someone wanted me to skate on figure skates I would end up catching that idiotic perforated edge on figure skates on the ice and do an immediate face plant). And I enjoyed ice hockey enough to play club hockey until someone who really didn’t know how to skate thought throwing his stick along the ice to stop you from getting too far ahead was the best way of stopping you.

Ice hockey is so cool <pun intended> that it doesn’t have a beginning date and it wasn’t even called ‘ice hockey’ when it began.

Ice Hockey was not invented nor did it start on a certain day of a particular year. It originated circa 1800 with students at Canada’s first college, King’s College, when they adapted the exciting field game called ‘Hurley’ to the ice of their favorite skating pond. The Blue Devils (that is their current mascot … no clue what it was then) created Ice Hurley which gradually developed into Ice Hockey.

<note: I am pleased someone was smart enough to change its name>

Anyway.

I will give you three reasons why you should watch the NHL playoffs:

1. No one is safe in the first round.

Since the NHL went to the 1-8 conference format a No. 8 seed had upset a No. 1 nine times. That’s nine times out 36 series. That’s a decent amount of upsets for what should be an “easier” matchup for the top seeds.

This year? The 1 seed Rangers face an 8 seed Ottawa team but they went 1-3 against Ottawa in the regular season.

2. Pennsylvanians outside of Happy Valley hate each other when it comes to ice hockey (and politics … but that is a different post).

The Penguins play the Flyers in round 1. And no one needs to be reminded of the hate between these two teams that’s existed for decades. Just in recent history, this will be the third meeting in the last six postseasons between the two. On paper, this matchup is expected to be highly physical and close. Not on paper but on the ice they will probably kill each other.

3. You can practice phonetics.

Nowhere will you find more names with a mixture of little used letters. Ovechkin. Yevgeni. Artyom Voronin. Rafalski. Konasew. Wisniewski. Czerkowski. Pekka Rinne. Pavel Datsyuk.

(I am fairly sure I didn’t make any of those up)

Ok.

Some real stuff about the Stanley Cup playoffs.

<insert blank space here>

Well.

If I knew about the NHL more than the fact Bobby Orr used to play and was on the front cover of Sports Illustrated <that’s how I know> when I was a kid and when I read SI from front to back religiously (no matter what was on the cover) I probably could have written something in that blank space.

But I don’t.

So I included this link in case you want to really know about the ice hockey playoffs. http://rkullman.blogspot.com/2012/04/stanley-cup-and-cheesecake-2012.html

Also.

Just in case you need some name to throw around the water cooler at work.

Players to watch: http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/lists/nhl-players-to-watch-in-playoffs-040512#photo-title=Brian+Campbell%252C+Florida+Panthers&photo=30869714

Oh.

As a bonus.

Some hockey smiles (kind of makes you wonder what mothers think when they send their kids out onto the rink): http://network.yardbarker.com/nhl/article_external/backyard/a_look_at_hockey_smiles/10525517?refmod=backyard

There you go.

Let’s hit the ice because I seriously doubt more than a dozen people (outside of Canada and some foreign country where a player is from … Iceland, Lapland, North Pole, Finland, etc.) will actually watch.

Plus. Ice hockey may be the most literal definition of enlightened conflict.

unicorns & rainbows

“The unicorn is a lonely, solitary creature that symbolizes hope.” – Ally McBeal

So. This is about unicorns.

And I guess about people who see unicorns.

Crazy? Sure.  Sounds it.

But hopefully it also makes you think about the people who seem to keep a vision of hope … and use it, however they elect to keep that hope at hand, to help them through the days and weeks.

So. This thought all began after watching this Ally McBeal episode the other day. I felt compelled to write about hope and, well, unicorns and how sometimes people go to some extreme, if not bizarre, ways to hold on to some light in seemingly dark days.

And while the episode was about the holidays I thought it was pretty relevant for any day (these days).

What do I mean?

Well.

I was going to try and right some whizbang words but instead I found something that someone wrote on their blog (sorry .. forgot who) that seemed to create the perfect reason for why seeing unicorns is perfectly acceptable …

What has made it challenging for me to write this is the darkness that I experience through the world’s anguish at this time. I am not living in days of light—I am living in days in need of light. I need to remember in this time of darkness that there are many who are seeking light.

I listen to the rantings of politicians who seem far more caught up in ideology and party positioning than they do in honestly meeting the deep challenges of our economy, the needs of our people, and caring for our planet. I witness the kindest of people being too busy to adequately separate their own food waste and recycling from their trash to reduce the build-up of what is becoming our planetary garbage dump. I witness fires and weather destroying lives and property and then reflect on the consequence of our priorities when we are unable to respond adequately. In this season of cold, I see the homeless in our own community seeking shelter from the wet and the winter.

And even, perhaps, more sharply, I returned from Israel more aware than ever of the incredibly wide divide between the humanity we perceive and the inhumanity shown by the actions of the leaders in that troubled region.

Right here at home, I am troubled by the inaction of so many of us who speak words of reconciliation, words of peace, words of promise, yet continue to find enemies who need to be stopped rather than people who need to be invited into the dialogue.

Yes, all that is true, yet I need to remember in this time of darkness that there are many who are seeking light.

Look. That sounds … well … dark. But I elect to focus on the ‘light’ or the refusal to give up on hope portion.

I don’t know if it’s the economy or the news or a general feeling of unrest but I do believe a lot of people just seem to be more empty these days. Well. Certainly less full of hope if they aren’t completely empty.

And in this Ally McBeal episode someone was fired for saying he saw a unicorn.

Well. I would imagine all of us would take this with a grain of salt (if not believe the person had completely lost their mind).

Yet the judge in the episode suggests “there are a lot of lonely people out there, looking for hope in strange places.”

In the end the judge decides that those people can keep their unicorns.

You know? It sounds a little crazy … and Whipper (the judge on Ally McBeal) was a quasi-nutcase on a show full of nutcases … but … you know what? I agree.

Some people need to believe that they have seen a unicorn. It doesn’t mean they are nuts … people need to find hope however they can … some people just see the unicorn as hope.

And, frankly, (and one of the characters says this also) … why should anyone have any say in where a person may look for that hope?

For god’s sake … all people want to be happy … and different people just get there in different ways. And if someone elects to use a unicorn? Well, geez, it could be worse, couldn’t it?

One of the characters in the episode says … “who’s to say the ones who dream of unicorns aren’t the lucky ones these days.”

I know … I know … this sounds nuts … but think about it.

Supposedly people who see them share some of the unicorn’s traits … they may be lonely but with virtuous hearts.

Mythology also suggests that only pure spirits can approach the unicorn.

In the Ally McBeal episode Ally recalls one time when she touched a unicorn and the character who saw it said he didn’t get close to the unicorn … but (here is the part that maybe makes you think a little) …  “but he won’t have another chance if he stops believing in the unicorn.”

Ok. That is a bigger thought than just a wacky tv show.

If we ask all people to stop “believing in unicorns” do people lose any chance of reaching what they hope for?

Whew.

C’mon.

The unicorn is a symbol of innocence and purity.

I know all of this sounds crazy (and it even looks crazy as I type it) … but … don’t we really want more of these people in today’s world?

In fact … chinese mythology says the fact that a unicorn has not been seen in many centuries suggests that we are living in “bad” times. It will appear once again when the time is right and when goodness reigns.

So maybe the people who see unicorns are actually the hope for the rest of us. Maybe they are the ones “where goodness reigns.”

Regardless.

If it isn’t that “big” … maybe someone who sees a unicorn somehow just feels safer. And I have no right to not allow someone that right in today’s world.

Also (and … boy … coming from a realist like me … this is gonna sound really odd) … I don’t know if I can explain it, but knowing that maybe someone out there can actually see a unicorn … well … maybe in a weird way they give me hope.

Now that I have typed that … it reminds me of something else another character said …

And, I’m afraid say it out loud because maybe if life finds out it’ll try to beat it out of them and that will be a shame.

Because, we all can use a little hope sometimes, you know. That feeling that everything’s going to be okay and that there’s going to be someone there to help make sure of that.

There are people who can make you believe in things you can’t see. and I think we miss that these days.

Look.

It’s a hard time for everyone these days but it is a particularly hard time for dreamers these days.

We all tend to think of dreams as a big, fluffy cloud that is surrounded by rainbows and unicorns.

So instead of ‘unicorns & rainbows’ we tend to focus on a mission … that everything in our lives would instantly be perfect if only we could have ABC, or do XYZ.

Well.

Maybe that the mission is really the fantasy … or, at minimum, part of the problem.

Maybe all those ‘missions’ are cramming up all our space that would have held dreams. And, really, this isn’t about going after your dreams but rather dreaming … and having hope … for something good and big and … well … maybe something that isn’t always tangible but intangible that lifts the heart and spirit.

I say all of this knowing that some readers will think this is wacky … but I also hope that people realize there is no right or wrong answer.

Being in the hope business is tricky these days and, as I said earlier, it’s tough being a dreamer these days.

But.

In fact I almost wish I was in the used rainbow business. I think people would be willing to buy discount dreams and discounted rainbows. What I mean by that is people would be willing to set aside the ‘big’ dreams and maybe pick up someone else’s that have been discarded … and they still look pretty good to reality.

In the meantime … maybe I should look for some people who make wishes on rainbows and see unicorns.

Cause I know it’s not really in my personal DNA to see unicorns.

And maybe that means I am not one of the lucky ones.

Maybe we need more rainbows (used or not).

Maybe we need more people who can see unicorns.

Here is what I am absolutely sure we need.

I do know is that hope is a must.

If you don’t have it, you’ve got to find it … lapses in hope happen and are okay … but you have to find it however you must … and maybe that is why I agree with the judge in Ally McBeal … let those people have their unicorns … who am I to judge on how someone holds on to hope.

Regardless.

Ally McBeal was an odd tv show.

But several episodes are must see for everyone.

This is one.

It may just remind you that seeing unicorns isn’t as wacky as you thought it was.

march mudness

“A deer can run and jump too, but I wouldn’t put him on a basketball court.” – Charles Barkley

“I was 10-2 yesterday… 10-3 I think.”- Charles Barkley

“There were 16 games yesterday.” – Ernie Johnson

So.

March madness. Let me begin with what I believe is the highlight of this year’s NCAA tournament so far <which is part of the issue I guess>.

I know I am probably in a minority but adding Charles Barkley to the madness was brilliant.

He doesn’t follow college basketball but he knows basketball.

And he knows the every man’s perspective on college basketball.

He doesn’t go into stats and some meaningless analytical drivel … he just … well … talks. And among the really smart insightful stuff he says incredibly wacky fun stuff.

They aren’t paying him enough.

Ok.

Beyond that. Something seems to be missing this year. And that is my theme as I outline how I am doing versus my enlightened predictions a couple weeks ago.

First. Let me begin by saying I am consistent.

If I were to take the last 10 years of brackets I have filled out I would say I would have won every year … if you only judged me on one half of the bracket. I cannot figure out why but almost every year I go gangbusters on one half (this year picking Kansas and Ohio state) and the other half my mother could have chosen better than I.

So. The good news (glass is half full good news)?

I didn’t have Kentucky or Louisville but had Kansas and Ohio state.

My bracket busters were certainly bracketbusters (UConn and Duke losing early).

And if you had taken my advice on picking against the “states” you would have been fine in the end. Oh. Damn. Ohio State. But.  Ohio could have <should have> won their game.

Anyway.

Whats missing in this year’s Madness that kind of make it more like mudness.

Missing ones.

I predicted no number one seeds in the final four. I got awful close (only one 1 in). and you would imagine that not having your number one seeds making the final four would create some buzz & excitement. Well.  Nope. Maybe a 1, 2 2’s and a 4 seed is too expected … I don’t know …but even one 1 doesn’t really make it exciting beyond the 4 schools in it.

Hugh's Missing the Point

Missing twos.

This is kind of crazy when you think about it but I am not sure I have seen more missed layups at this level in my entire life. I am not going to suggest Baylor would have beaten Kentucky but there was a stretch where they could have put the squeeze on Kentucky and they missed like three layups in a row. Syracuse missed a bunch. Kansas could have put Carolina away early if they had made some of theirs. Ohio. Someone burn that game tape. No one on that team should watch the tape of the game they lost … make half of the missed layups they had and it wouldn’t have gone to overtime.

I don’t have any reason for this. No. I don’t think it’s because of the advent of the 3 point shot.

But it’s got to be something. Even high school kids make their layups.

Missing threes.

Maybe this is a corollary to the layups but the live & die by the three’s mentality has gotten a little crazy. Because I have a tip to every coach out there (just in case all the best of the best read my blog) … you cannot ride three’s all the way to the title.  There will be a game <or two> where they just won’t fall.  And then you gotta do something else. And even in a game when they do fall (see Wisconsin against Syracuse) you gotta do something else.

Look.  I get that a 3 gets you back in the game really really fast … but if you want to list the top 3 momentum killers I have to imagine a missed three, when you have a break away and no one is under the basket, is gonna be close to numero uno.

Note. The only exception is Jimmer Fredette & BYU.

Oh.

Note followup. They lost also.

Missing four.

Michigan State, Syracuse, Duke, North Carolina … all teams were missing a key player in the tournament.  I am not sure I can remember a March madness when several of the best teams were missing a key player from what actually got them there into the madness.

I am not sure anything would have been different in the end (because they all lost games that the other team did what they needed to do to win) but it does make you think ‘what if.’

Missing Charles

I am gonna miss Charles with college sports.

Everyone is so serious and then … well … there is Charles.

Right after a commercial to drive people to the new show Hardcore Pawn ?

“I know what I’m gonna watch tonight!  Oh, sorry, wrong spelling… I saw four letters and got excited!” - Charles Barkley

Awesome.

Missing heroes … or … “the making of March Mudness”.

No Cinderella team (and, no, Rick Pitino will never qualify as a Cinderella). Only one overtime game <in ENTIRE tournament>. No heroes (like a Jimmer Fredette or a Kemba Walker last year). No one player one game heroics. No last second shots. No feel good story. No madness (except that one Friday).

And maybe it is because of all the other sports stuff … bountygate, tebow to NYC, or Tiger finaly winning and march madness is taking an unexpected backseat. Regardless. Its Mudness this year (unless you are a KY, OSU, Louisville or KU fan).

The Missing Final Pick.

Louisville figures out some way to beat Kentucky.

Ohio State beats Kansas.

And while I wouldn’t mind Louisville winning it all I just cannot see them doing it.

(note: these picks also semi-salvage my brackets)

Another Madness almost done.

Enjoy.

And I hope you did better in your pool then I did.

lightbulbs die people depart

“Light bulbs die, my sweet. I will depart.” – Mr. Magorium

I enjoy truly good movies in that they take metaphorical characters to the extremes to make a point. And I love it when they do so to make a point about life … and living life.

Mr. Margorium’s Wonder Emporium. It’s an odd movie.

But it is an odd delightful movie.

And metaphorically speaking they box you in with the characters …

- the cynical practical responsible ‘grown up’ (lovingly called Mutant) who has lost the joy of imagination (let’s call it the magic in life) …

- the child who represents the joy that can be found when you are open to life’s magic …

- the mystical adult (Magorium) who lives in an adult world with a decidedly un-adult view (and is slightly an outcast) …

- and … well … the hopeful future (Mahoney) … entering the adult world with the spark of magic within but has trouble seeing how that spark fits in an adult world (lets call her ‘hope eternal for that which is magical in life’). <I bet I use that phrase again some day>

Let me begin with the ‘hopeful future’ and the resistance Life has a habit of those maturing into adulthood. As Mr. Magorium suggests to Mahoney … “you have a sparkle” … something reflective of something bigger trying to get out.

His advice?

You have to live … “I have.” – Mr. Magorium

Short line. Big thought. And maybe the biggest tipping point decision one has to make moving from youth to adulthood. And it is a biggie of a decision.

Anyway.

Between these 4 characters you wander through pretty much every aspect you have in your own pea-like brain.

And while the movie is meant for kids it is also fun for adults … and it is thoughtful for adults.

This movie is a wonderful little film with Natalie Portman and Dustin Hoffman. Hoffman is Magorium who has decided it is time for him to leave this world and let Portman’s character run the shop <symbolic for youth to adulthood>. Magorium is awesome. He is a man with crazy eyebrows and a pet zebra and has owned his toy store for over 113 years. Obviously this isn’t an ordinary toy store (oh … is any really good toystore anywhere truly ordinary?). This is a magical toy store that has a temper tantrum when it hears the bad news Magorium is dying. The problem is that only Magorium knows that he’s dying. He’s not sick or weak, and he doesn’t foresee some violent or accidental death. He just knows <and his may be one of the best parts> because he once found the perfect pair of shoes and fell in love with them so entirely that he bought enough to last his whole life.

And now he is on his last pair.

Therefore … his life is over.

And with that … he states ‘light bulbs die … he is simply departing’.

What a wonderful thought.

He is departing ‘a whole life.’

Don’t we all wish we could end that way? And maybe there is a part of us who like the concept of departing rather than dying.

And maybe make us think a little, through this incredibly strange character, why is his life whole (that is pretty much what the movie is about … and showing how others can also live a whole life)?
The easy lessons (kind of). He does not judge but sees things with fresh and open eyes. He doesn’t condemn actions simply encourages to act & think differently.

He treats time as a gift of freedom to think and remember and understand that which was, that which is and is willing to recreate that which is … well … impossible … to transform time.

Its not just having an imagination … it is an attitude.

“you have to believe it to see it.”

<how awesome is that thought>

And when I heard that I went back into my files and pulled this out … “seeing-is-believing is a blind spot in man’s vision”- bucky fuller.

Boy. I agree with that. It is a failure of imagination if you solely believe something must be seen to be believed. Ok. Maybe not even a failure of imagination … something worse. It is almost a belief that nothing new, nothing seemingly impossible, is possible.

So. This sometimes silly movie makes you think about all of this is and about learning to … well … unlearn. To free yourself from all the things that you ‘know’ and the things which may keep you from undiscovered roads.

And that sometimes believing in something is more important than anything else. And asking you to remember that all things which happen to you endlessly beget new thoughts that could change your life (and it’s a never ending process).

And if you do that?

Well. life is magical.  It’s kind of like a magical … toy store … as it is.

And with that thought … you hear the best advice of all …

“Your life is an occasion. Rise to it.” – Mr. Magorium

Life is an occasion.

In the end that is what the movie makes you think about … the magic within you, within any of us … that we need to rise to … or lose it.

And that is the point for Molly Mahoney who also represents “hope eternal” for all adults (the metaphor).

“What Mahoney needed was the opportunity to prove to herself that she was something more than she believed.”

Silly movie with a non-silly lesson.

You need to believe in you. And, I guess, believe that you have some magic somewhere inside you.

It is a neat lesson.

And a lesson provided in a pretty magical way.

best advice people

So.

Getting advice is tricky.

Ok.

Getting the best advice is tricky. You cannot get ‘best advice’ from anyone.

Have you ever noticed that the people who give the best advice typically don’t talk too much about themselves?

It makes you wonder a little.

Where did such knowledge to give advice come from?

Here is what I believe.

The people who give the best advice have been through the most.

They may not talk about it any other way than in the advice that they give.

Their silence with regard to themselves speaks volumes.

Inside there is lots of ‘stuff.’

And by stuff I mean knowledge, wisdom <in some form or fashion>, experiences and … well … a nice ability to take all that stuff inside them and look at you … and understand … and articulate it.

Now.

That’s a lot of ‘stuff.’

They not only have the ability to see within the circumstances but their own experiences to match up.

Think about that one for just a second.

That means they have such a broad experience base they can relate to a broad group of circumstances.

THAT means they have been through more than you.

Yeah.

Think about that for a bit.

Because I am not sure we do … because, frankly, we are too busy getting the well needed advice.

And we think about it even less because I believe people who give great advice tend to be broader in their thinking and have an innate sense of curiosity which is a deceptively positive cloak for their own experiences.

A cloak that looks an awful like … I don’t know … wisdom?

But.

The wisdom needs to come from somewhere.

All that said.

At some point … they may not need advice … but they may need someone to listen.

Maybe not.

But maybe.

All I know for sure is that the people who give the best advice tend to have been the ones who have experienced the most.

swearing

Ok. I swear.

I try to be careful about it.  And, as with most people, I am careful especially in the work environment. I am even cognizant of it here in my writing.

But, in the end, I swear.

I am not opposed to dropping the ‘f bomb’ if it is a useful adjective (although I believe I have used it as a pronoun, noun, verb, adverb, compound word … whatever … and even possibly as a piece of punctuation if that is possible).

I have found it significantly more effective than simply “talk to the hand” methodology  (which I have actually found to STIMULATE swearing).

Anyway.

I imagine swearing when someone is stressed, extremely angry, when one gets hurt, or when someone is surprised by something major (such as being in a car accident) is understandable and even may be acceptable in today’s world.

But I discuss with myself (typically in my own head and not out loud) if it’s pathetic when swearing is part of someone’s everyday language <me included in the someone’s category>.

Why?

“Swearing is the means by which the inarticulate give themselves the impression of eloquence.” – Talleyrand (and the bastard said it a couple centuries ago …)

I have a couple of choice words for Talleyrand but that said it does make me think. And, yet, having said that …. pretty much everyone swears (excepting maybe my mother …. but I did draw a “damn, damn … damn you” from her at some point in my tweens … oh … but that is a different post).

Does ‘the majority’ make it acceptable? Maybe even diminish it’s ‘inarticulate’ label?

Well. Here is what we swearers have going for us (and my belief that “swearing is a good and healthy activity”).

Some guy actually studied swearing in the workplace (go figure … they got studies for everything). Because swearing is risky, you would tend to believe the safest situation in which to swear is one in which your hearer has already been a co-conspirator in the world of swearing (translation: you have shared f-bombs in the past).

Au contraire mon frère (that’s not swearing … even in  foreign language).

Not true the study says.

Its one thing if someone steps up to the plate and calls you or someone else an asshole but quite another situation to use that as an invitation to do some swearing yourself.

That is a swearing faux pas according to the study.

Anyway.

swearing enhances study

My mother believes swearing is a weak mind trying to express itself because they aren’t smart enough to articulate it with “real words.”  And, honestly, a part of me agrees with her <even though I do believe word choice, even swear words, is a generational characteristic>. And, I will add, even though a swearing proponent am I, I would agree that it’s one thing to swear a blue streak if you stub your toe on a piece of furniture or if you’re having a very rotten day.

And it’s another thing if a person feels the need to use the f bomb every second or third word.

That person seriously needs to buy a dictionary in order to expand his/her vocabulary.

I guess I could argue my use of swear words is lazy thinking. I imagine I should find another word that captures the essence of the f bomb I am tempted to drop on significant amount of occasions.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh … but here is another “but” (to defend myself).

On the other hand, the Guardian (one of my favorite best written papers in the world) thinks the appropriate use of swear words is effective in communicating the message. They’re just words for fuck’s sake (those were their words … published as a matter of fact … so who the fuck am I to disagree?).

Swear words do carry emotive content, that otherwise is more difficult to convey, and they really are just words.

I believe the Guardian is typically judicious in their use of ‘mature language’ and a bit of well-placed swearing works wonders in communication:

-          After Blair’s duplicity and warmongering, Blunkett and Straw’s attacks on liberty, Blears and Smith’s tendency to charge their Kitkats and porn to the public, Prescott fucking his secretary, and Brown fucking the economy, what an indictment of Cameron that the Tories aren’t a shoo-in at the election.”

(how awesome is that)

Same goes for the journalism in the paper. If it works, use it. But don’t if it doesn’t. Oh. And don’t overdo it.

How do people, like, not curse? How is it possible? There are these gaps in speech where you just have to put a “fuck.” I’ll tell you who the most admirable people in the world are: newscasters. If that was me, I’d be like, “And the motherfuckers flew the fucking plane right into the Twin Towers.” How could you not, if you’re a human being? Maybe they’re not so admirable. Maybe they’re robot zombies.— Nick Hornby (A Long Way Down)

So I have some things going for my swearing habit.

Look.

Swearing isn’t always a good idea, but the writers of the Guardian, and most of its readers, are grown-ups. In fact … most of us are grownups (I won’t do the research but assuming I look at the global population I envision a bigger % in the 18+ column than in the 1-17 column).

And in today’s world many of these words are not ‘bad’ language … they are just language. Often they are used because we don’t have the vocabulary to use a different word, sometimes because they can be exceptionally expressive.

Look. In his day Shakespeare was quite happy to use them.

Anyway.

Not me … some one else's study!

I probably have a well earned reputation for this type of language, but, c’mon, nowadays even the most saintly person we know has trouble resisting a “jesus christ!” or “shit!” on occasion <just doing a good job of avoiding several key monster swear words>.

Oh.

Another good piece of news … well no .. its GREAT news.

It turns out that swearing actually relieves pain. This according to a new study by Richard Stephens, John Atkins, and Andrew Kingston of Keele University in the UK (yeah … no shit … ANOTHER study on swearing).

Their study shows that there are many positive, beneficial aspects of swearing, including harmless venting and social bonding.

Swearing does a lot of good.
In Stephens’ study, college students were asked to list “five words you might use after hitting yourself on the thumb with a hammer” (they came up with fuck, shit, bugger, bastard, bollocks, etc.) and “five words to describe a table” (such as brown, flat, and hard). If there was a swear word on the first list, they would repeat that word at a steady rhythm and volume (no yelling allowed) while one hand was submerged in cold water.

The same procedure was then followed with the non-filthy word.
Going into the study, the researchers believed that swearing was actually a type of pain-related catastrophising—in other words, a “maladaptive response to pain” that made things like horrible agony worse, not better. But Stephens and company found that “…repeating a swear word, compared with repeating a neutral word, allowed participants to hold their hands in ice cold water for 40 seconds longer (on average), they perceived less pain on a pain perception scale (questionnaire) and they had a larger heart rate increase. Because we saw an increase in heart rate we think that people had an emotional reaction to swearing (indicated by the increase in heart rate), bringing about the fight or flight response, which is known to increase pain tolerance (make people more able to withstand pain).”

The conclusion:

In a nutshell, swearing has an analgesic, pain-lessening effect that could give Ibuprofen a run for its money, probably by working us into an aggressive, heightened state.
(so we swearers have this going for us)

Oh.

But there is more.
If pain relief isn’t enough to make you part of the swearers of the world consider the work of Timothy Jay, Professor of Psychology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, who has repeatedly found that “…swearing is a common conversational practice resulting in no obvious harm.” (no shit <part 2> … ANOTHER study on swearing)

His work makes clear that social cohesion, emotional satisfaction, and humor are among the top good things about bad words.

Wow. This is Maslow stuff. Self actualization, self esteem and socialization … all in association with swearing … kind of makes you wonder if Maslow was a swearer.

Anyway. Back to the study. Jay also defended another positive of swearing:

“Angry swearing can help the speaker change the listener’s behavior—yelling at someone who did something wrong—‘you fucking idiot, you made an illegal left turn, cutting me off.’ Much of swearing is like this, a corrective measure, but usually between people who know each other.”

Wow.

Great point.

And much less dangerous than road rage pulling out a gun and shooting someone as far as corrective measures.
Next (as you ponder that last thought).
You have to wonder whether more innocent exclamations like “Zeus’s lightning bolts!” or “noodlenuts!” (or ‘frak’ from Battlestar Gallactica which I have to include because I include a quote reference soon) have the same beneficial effects.

Fay emphatically has an answer:

“NO. Euphemisms exist because they don’t do what the more offensive words do…. We already have a rich vocab and the inventions have to compete for space, which they don’t very well, historically speaking. The seven dirty words have been around for centuries.”

And apparently Stephens agrees:

“…I doubt they (pain-sufferers) would have the same emotional reaction to frak, although because frak is somewhat similar to fuck, maybe there would be a lesser effect. That remains to be seen.”

One last thought (from an expert on swearing not me).
Stephens said, “…it fits with our theory that people can self-regulate their own emotional state by swearing—think of a sports team coach using four letter words in a team talk about getting at the opposing team). On the other hand, if it is the shock value of the words that produces the effect then one would expect overuse of swear words to lessen the effect. Investigating this would make a great follow-up study.”

One last thought (from me).
Hell yes … investigating this would make a great follow up study.

So.

All that said. Swear on, my friends.

It relieves pain, is a great social bonding tool and its fun.

enlightened march madness

College basketball march madness is maybe the best sports event in america … probably because it is not just one big game … it is three weeks of constant gnashing of teeth and discussion and good basketball games and, well, madness.

The sports gurus go nuts this time of the year breaking down every possible aspect <and even aspects the normal mind wouldn’t consider> of the teams in march madness.

But.  I would remind everyone it is called madness for a reason.

Sports gurus have won championships, most likely played the game at some respectable level, get paid to analyze and talk about it nonstop, maybe even have coached a game or two and most definitely even watch the games … but …  predicting the future?

Gee. I don’t think even they can do that (hence the inevitable … “on any given day any team can beat another” caveat).

So.

I will enlighten everyone on this years madness (just doing my part to help out).

Oh. Here are my credentials. I scored over 30 points in one game <an intramural game>. I threw a no look pass once that broke the nose of someone standing on the grass off the court. I have been dunked on <by a 5’ 10” kid named Hightower of all names>. My undergraduate school is on basketball probation until Mars is colonized. My graduate school team has more PhD candidates than wins this year.

Read on at your own peril.

So. My way to predict the March Madness. Study all the teams ad nausea. Drink until I am nauseous. Spend hours watching ESPN consulting with all the experts on RPIs (although I thought for years that was Rensalear Polytechnic Institute and we were talking about their ice hockey team), chart who is hot at the end of the year and who was crumbling like a bluff in California during an earthquake … and then look for the Cinderella slipper (which sounds kinda creepy).

Then. After spending hours going over data and filling out multiple sheets …  well … I throw those away.  It’s a crap shoot.  Ask someone who has never watched college basketball and have them pick by school colors or mascots (which mascot could beat up the other one is always an awesome criteria) and you are more likely to pick a definite winner <please don’t sue me if you use this method>.

Anyway. Speaking of mascots.

Mascot newcomers test:

Let’s begin by …

-          welcoming in the South Dakota State jackrabbits (are there Jillrabbits too?), little do you know but this is really the North Dakota Fighting Sioux but the NCAA has banned them until they change their Indian-diminishing ‘fighting Sioux’ name so they are playing as south Dakotans (will anyone be able to tell the difference?)

The others of note …

-          Norfolk State Spartans (I am unclear between the association between Norfolk & Spartans but lets go for it)

-          Belmont Bruins (I would like to remind everyone <maybe you lost that particular National Geographic> that a bruin is a bear … a Eurasian Brown Bear as a matter of fact)

-          Lamar Cardinals (I just added them because I had no clue they were the cardinals)

-          Vermont Catamounts (boy … we got screwed by UVM getting in … if they hadn’t we could have had Great Danes <Albany> or SeaWolves <not to be confused with SeaHorses> or Terriers or Retrievers … now that, my friends, is a conference of mascots)

-          UNC Asheville Bulldogs (not to be confused with their conference mate the Runnin’ Bulldogs of Gardner Webb … hey … does this mean Asheville doesn’t run and … well … geez … my head hurts … ok, and maybe next year the Blue Hose <stop laughing> of Presbyterian gets in)

-          Long Island Blackbirds (in honor of the Hunger Games version of March Madness I believe they should wear their MockingJay jerseys)

-          Lehigh Mountain Hawks (not to be confused by the Valley Hawks or Rolling Hill Hawks or … well … whatever)

Bracketbuster (1): P(d)uke

Duke has an equal chance of being a final four team as they do getting knocked out in the first round. I cannot think of another team in this year’s tournament who could go from out house to big house (or vice versa) quicker. Your entire bracket could be bear or bust based on this choice.

Me? Pick ‘em to lose early this year.

Bracketbuster (2): Connecticut

Which UConn team will show up this week (and next)? Aw. Who cares. All they need to do is show up for the Kentucky game then it is clear sailing.

Here is what I do know … here is the 3/13 early morning Iditarod update – Ramey Smyth surges and now third into White Mountain    We are now in early AM reporting,  after noting that Aliy Zirkle is now in at 1:25 AM.   Her lead dogs Pocito and Dingle, impressively alert and crowd favorites, followed Aliy’s every move …

I think the lead Huskies, Pocito & Dingle, will be done with Iditarod and well rested and show up on Calhoun’s bench in time.

So. Me? Pick the Huskies to go deep this year. Calhoun is packin’ it up soon and his kids will know that so may actually pay attention for an entire game (plus Dingle will probably drool on the floor during the Kentucky game and someone will slip at a key moment).

Number ones go down

Watch me go down in flames so fast even Harry Potter’s phoenix couldn’t rise back up … but this is my crazy pick.

No number ones in the final 4.

Seems like a no brainer when you see my reasons why.

1. The Mayan Calendar.

2. Ohio State, Missouri and Kansas are all 2’s (hence I put them as number 2) and the final is on April 2nd.

3. Ponce De Leon founded Florida on April 2nd in 1513. (huh? … sorry … that is my enlightened factoid of the post)

4. The 1’s lose because:

- Kentucky … hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … despite being the most talented team … yes, I do believe a zone based more mature team can beat them, no, I don’t think this young a team will be able to weather a “one time crunch game” which inevitably March Madness comes down to and, yes, I think Calipari is a crappy big game coach.

- UNC loses because I think Kansas is a better team.

- Michigan State loses because I am not even sure they get to Missouri but if they do they will run the Spartans up & down the court so much even the 300 couldn’t keep up.

- Syracuse is Syracuse. (note: I wrote this before I knew Melo was ineligible)

5. Obi Wan Kenobi (alec Guinness) was born on April 2nd and I feel the force within me telling me it is so.

The choice between State or no State

I will state for the record right here and now when in doubt avoid the States.

Ok. What do I mean?

This year we have New Mexico & State. North Carolina & State. Michigan & State. Colorado & State. Florida & State. South Dakota State (I am just pleased to find out they are still a state).  Virginia & State (Norfolk State … ok … that one throws me).

Hey. As I type this I have now figured out why we don’t let Canada in the NCAA. They have provinces (this is a freebie idea for Canada: create Newfoundland State University and University of Newfoundland <my luck … there probably is> and I bet you can get into the NCAA).

Sorry. I digress.

Frankly I cannot usually tell you the difference between state and non state schools. In my pea like brain I figure if you have to put State in the actual name of your school to tell people it actually resides in a state, let alone that state, you must have lower IQs (c’mon … I just shouldn’t have to tell people it’s a state).

Regardless.

Take the non states. Seems smarter.

Sense of irony (or sense of humor)

Every year the NCAA does something that makes me think there is a lot of alcohol involved when designing the brackets and a couple of “wait ‘til everybody gets a load of this” type guffaws.

Vanderbilt – Harvard. Brilliant (pun intended). Already being called the SAT bowl.

Possibility of Huggins versus ex-Huggins (West Virginia/Cincinnati). Drinks will be free that game.

Possibility of a Kentucky-UConn/Indiana/Duke matchup … all in one bracket. Maybe Barbra Streisand will be invited to sing Memories before each game. oh. Is she still alive?

The women of march madness:

Let us not forget that this is college. And young women go to all these colleges. And there is a lot of drinking done on college campuses (except at BYU of course) so while there will be a bunch of screaming & yelling & cheering there will also be a bunch of guys oogling the women of schools we don’t typically have the honor of oogling.

With that here is the Yardbarker coed review (or babes of the bottom bracket as they call it).

This is my gratuitous creepy guy inappropriate male Neanderthal section.

http://network.yardbarker.com/all_sports/article_external/backyard/babes_of_the_bottom_bracket_2012/10290052?refmod=backyard

Ok.

talk to the hand if you don't like it

All that said. Here are my enlightened final four picks with a twist. I have who I think will win it and then I also list the team who I want to put in there but just don’t have the kahones to do it.

South: No. 9 Connecticut (sleeper: hmmmmmmmmmm … that is a sleeper)

West: No. 2 Missouri (sleeper: New Mexico … although I was tempted by Marquette)

East: No. 2 Ohio State (sleeper: West Virginia. Huggins may be an asshole but he is an asshole who knows how to coach … and they get a good start in Pittsburgh <which is west West Virginia)

Midwest: No. 2 Kansas (sleeper: none … this bracket looks horrible outside of Kansas and UNC)

And after going that far I just cannot pick a winner.

Well.

At least right now. Maybe I will after I get to see some games and see how badly I am doing.

Whew.

I am sure all the incredible insight and factoids have enlightened you, but in the end it still comes down to the voices in your head (just the ones talking about basketball this time … ignore the others).

Think about this.

Taking four No. 1 seeds to advance to the Final Four is the prudent and responsible thing to do … and it probably won’t have you win the pool.

And it isn’t fun. And, seriously, who really wants to be prudent and responsible? (freudian slip on my part)

I can almost guarantee you <history is actually on my side on this one> that not all 4 number ones will get there … albeit history is certainly not on the side of my enlightened picks.

Aw. WTF. Pick what you want.