I played ball hockey last night for the first time in years.  I must admit, despite discovering how horribly out-of-shape I am, I really enjoyed playing.  We did not have too many people, so it was 3 on 3 with two goalies.

Most of the guys I played with are pretty decent.  Not only are they in shape, a few play competitive hockey and thusly have the commensurate skill to go along with the endurance.  Needless to say, before the ball was even dropped, I knew I was hopelessly outclassed.

Despite that, I tried to play a smart game.  Knowing the other two guys on my team were far better players, I played defence and took the man instead of the ball.  The strategy seemed to work, and I was happy that the other team only managed to score one goal while I was playing (though that probably has to do more with the goalie than myself).

I took a stick off the hand and a slapshot off the calf, but oh well.  I don’t mind blocking shots.  Let’s face it…if you’re not skilled enough to score, you had better be able to man up and stand in front of a slapshot.

The other guys were good.  One guy who I work with all the time, who may not be the best player on the floor at any given time, did very well using the reverse strategy that I employed.  When he had the ball, he continually fired it at the net.  He was not necessarily looking to score, but hoping someone could scoop out a rebound.  As it turned out, he scored more often than his mates got the rebound.

This is something I wondered about when I watched professional hockey.  It is a sound strategy that many of the best teams employ, and many of the unsuccessful teams do not.  The more you put the puck on net, the more you will score.  To me, it’s the law of averages. 

Given the average NHL calibre goalie has a save percentage hovering around .900, that gives the shooter a one in ten chance of scoring.  Therefore, using that math, if the team puts forty shots on net during a game, they will likely be rewarded with four goals.  To win, you have to score.  Additionally, if that team is controlling the puck, it means their opponents do not have the chance to shoot, improving the odds of winning even more.

Ergo, or in conclusion for now…I have decided that I need to get myself some protection for my hands, protection for my groin, and a new pair of shoes.

Here’s looking forward to next week!

In my Biography section, I mentioned a little known series that aired on Fox way back in 1996 called Profit.  The show was a soap opera, much in the same veins as Dallas, but with a much harder edge.  Jim Profit, the protagonist of the show, makes J.R. Ewing look like a choirboy.

Jim Profit is Satan in a suit.  He had an abusive childhood, and was raised in a cardboard box.  He is the Junior Vice-President of acquisitions at Gracen and Gracen, a multinational company.  He wants to run the company, and it does not matter what it takes to get the job done.

Adrian Pasdar played the role of Jim Profit to perfection.  If this show had been allowed to run for a full season, he would have received an Emmy Award for his performance.  The supporting cast was just as good.

The show – in my opinion only – was spectactularly written.  It should have been a hit – but it wasn’t.  The show was cancelled after only five episodes due to viewer uproar, especially in the Southern Bible Belt.  Apparently, these God-fearing people did not like the fact that you so wanted to cheer for the bad guy.  He was the perfect anti-hero.  It also did not help that Mr. Profit did not mind sleeping with his mother.

This show was ahead of its time.  Far ahead.  If the show had been developed for HBO or Showtime, it would likely be still running today.

Synopsis (from IMDB):  In Nazi-occupied France during World War II, a group of Jewish-American soldiers known as “The Basterds” are chosen specifically to spread fear throughout the Third Reich by scalping and brutally killing Nazis. The Basterds soon cross paths with a French-Jewish teenage girl who runs a movie theater in Paris which is targeted by the soldiers.

This movie is very good.  It is complete fiction, historically inaccurate, and very fun.  As a word to the wise, it is very violent (as with most Tarantino movies).  In the theatre, two old ladies actually got up and left (and did not return) once the scalpings began.  I’m guessing they haven’t seen anything by Quentin Tarantino before (and likely, never will again).

Brad Pitt did a pretty good job as the leader of the basterds.  I’ve never been a huge fan of his (although the Ocean’s Trilogy wasn’t bad work), and outside of a cameo by Mike Myers he is the name start of the film.  Ergo…consider that high praise for Mr. Pitts’ work in the film.

The guy who did impress me is Cristoph Waltz.  He plays the evil, cunning, and smooth German Colonel Hans Landa.  The man is fluent in many languages and uses them all in the movie.  Tarantino himself has said that this movie could not have been made without Waltz, as he plays the part of Landa to a “T.”  Oscar-worthy, in my opinion that does not count anywhere except with the concept of my own reality.

Mélanie Laurent, as Shoshanna Dreyfus, also did a wonderful job.  She played her character very well, and I see big things for her in the future.  She is also very attractive.

I really enjoyed this movie, though the running time of 2 hours and 40 minutes passed by very fast.  Apparently Tarantino chopped this movie down from about four hours, so I will definately re-watch it if the full version is released on Blu-Ray.

Recently, I sat down and watched the three Bourne movies:  The Bourne Identity, The Bourne Supremacy, and The Bourne Ultimatum.  All three movies were very well done, and make me want for more.  There is a new movie due in 2011, but I wonder how it will benefit the original trilogy.

The Bourne Identity

Synopsis (from IMDB):  On a stormy night, a young man is pulled out of the Mediterranean Sea by the crew of a fishing boat.  Thinking the young man is dead, a curious fisherman with a scalpel finds two bullets in his back and a miniature laser device in his hip.  The laser reveals a Swiss bank account number.  But our wet hero isn’t dead, and soon finds himself in Zurich.  In the bank vault the young man discovers his name, Jason Bourne.  In addition, he finds a baffling pile of different passports, all with his picture, and a huge pile of cash.  In the U.S. Embassy, Jason Bourne discovers his love interest and travel partner, Marie, along with the fact that someone wants to kill him.  Armed with a bag of money and mysterious martial arts skills, with Marie by his side, Bourne scours Paris for clues about his identity and past life…and finds himself in the middle of two assassination plots masterminded by the CIA.

The first Bourne movie was (in my humble opinion only) the best of the three (beating the third movie by a hair).  Instantly, right from the get go you were captivated by Bourne and his goal to try and figure out who (or what) he was.  Great plot, great background story and character development line a movie that has a lot of action in it.  You do not get bored, and are always kept on edge.  The car chase scene throughout Paris was great.  Matt Damon was a great choice to play Jason Bourne.  Initially, I had my reservations but seeing the movie (all three of them) I was very satisfied with the choice.  Franka Potente was a good choice to play Marie and did a very good job as well.  Prior to this movie, I had never heard of her.

The Bourne Supremacy

Synopsis (from IMDB):  After escaping from the emotional and physical pain he previously encountered, Jason Bourne and his girlfriend Marie begin a new life as far away as possible.  But when an assassination attempt on Bourne goes horribly wrong, Bourne must re-enter the life he wanted to leave behind, in order to find out the truth why they are still after him.

Of the three films, I enjoyed this one the least.  In so saying that, it is still a very good movie, however it was more action based then anything.  There was no real plot development, and had you not watched the first movie many things would not have made much sense at all.  The killing of Marie sets Bourne off on a chase to sanitize her killers.  The action scenes were great, and they at least show Bourne, that despite having superior physical abilities can still be hurt.  The mandatory car chase scene was not as good as the first movie, though still kept you interested.

The Bourne Ultimatum

Synopsis (from IMDB):  Bourne is once again brought out of hiding, this time inadvertently by London-based reporter Simon Ross who is trying to unveil Operation Blackbriar – an upgrade to Project Treadstone – in a series of newspaper columns.  Bourne sets up a meeting with Ross and realizes instantly they’re being scanned.  Information from the reporter stirs a new set of memories, and Bourne must finally, ultimately, uncover his dark past whilst dodging The Company’s best efforts in trying to eradicate him.

This movie and the first movie were ranked very closely on my favorites scale.  The producers completed the story arc started in the first movie and wrapped up the plot development at the end of this film, giving closure to the Bourne saga.  This movie would not have made much sense had you not seen the first two movies, which is the only knock against it.  With all three movies, the scenery is top notch.  The trilogy literally spans the globe.  Although the majority of the filming was in Europe, locations such as New York city, India, and Moscow are part of the films.  It’s nice to be able to watch a movie that was not filmed in the United States.  It just seems to add something extra.  As with the first two movies, the mandatory car chase scene (this time through New York city) was fantastic. 

I have yet to read any of the Bourne novels, by Robert Ludlum.  However, as soon as I am finished with my current set of books I will pick them up.  It is commonly known that the books are always better than the movies, and being an avid reader I will take advantage of that at the earliest available opportunity.

This post is a bit of a deviation from my normal posts about MMA in that this time I am not recapping an event or postulating upon the outcome of a fight.  This post is about a website that caters to fans of the fight game.  In an industry that is brand new, Revgear has been around for thirteen years.  As it stands, I have been going through their website for a couple of hours now.  Unlike many websites, that primarily carry only t-shirts, Revgear carries an insidious amount of product.  T-shirts are only a small part of their business.  They offer fight gear, training gear, and instructional dvd’s for almost any combat sport.  In addition to their own brand, they carry many famous labels such as Bad Boy and Master Toddy’s.

The website itself it very well presented.  It is fast, easy to navigate, and clean.  The product descriptions are clean and thorough.  Checkout is a breeze, and you do not have to create an account to do so.  California residents will have to pay sales tax (as the site is based in that state).  The shipping charge seems reasonable domestically, but shipping internationally could get expensive depending on what you would like to order.  That is not Revgear’s fault, however (though I would make a suggestion to ship all of their products to Canada via 3-day Fedex (Air).  They will save a fortune that way.) 

Revgear gives back to the fans and fighters by sponsoring them, as well as tournaments.  They also sponsor high profile fighters such as Marco Ruas and Bas Rutten.  All in all, despite the amount of product on their website, I can see Revgear adding more and more brand names in the future and growing their company.  The dollars are out there now, especially in Mixed Martial Arts.  I am going to pickup some Revgear products, and when I get them I will follow up with an additional post on their quality.