Sunday, January 28, 2007

Floyd Fails Again


It was simply distasteful when millionaire doper Floyd Landis started begging for money. And now that he has fallen well short of his goal of two million dollars it's simply pathetic. Think about this for a minute; Landis has been a highly paid cyclist for many years (At Phonak he made $1 million base salary - annually. Added to that was sponsorship money which for Landis should have been in the $1-4 million per year range. Then bonuses, appearance fees, speaking fees, Floyd's goofy training camps and so on.), yet here he is acting like a regular street bum. But aiming high. He may be out of work but he's not homeless. Since 97.5% of us have net worth's less than $1 million it means that roughly 97.5% of the suckers who sent money in had net worth's significantly less than that of Landis. Doesn't this seem backwards to you? Still, there were enough idiots out there sending money to the Floyd Fund that it's collected $150,000.00 so far. Must be the same idiots that sent money to Tyler Hamilton. That was money well spent, wasn't it?

Wait? Did I call it the Floyd Fund? My bad. It's called the Fairness Fund. See, it's not about Floyd, it's about fairness for all of us. Nice marketing spin Floyd. By claiming that he needs the money to, "attain a fair and just hearing", he suggests two incorrect premises. One, that he needs the money. This is just plain bull crap. He has more than enough money enough to defend himself. He would rather use your money though, apparently saving his own cash for things like houses in expensive gated communities so that he can hang with his neighbors Tom Cruise, Steven Spielberg, Queen Elizabeth II and Barry Bonds. Hmm.. Barry Bonds? I wonder what Barry and Floyd have in common? See below for more on Bonds.

1
The Landis home (center-left) in gated community. The Landis' need your help.

And two, that he is somehow not getting a fair hearing. He's free to get hearings from the International Cycling Union, the French doping agency, the US Anti-Doping Agency and the World Anti-Doping Agency. But like his mentor Lance Armstrong, Landis seems to be claiming that there is a world wide conspiracy that's out to get him. Landis is even claiming that he is being denied basic human rights. What? Is he being lowered, alive, into a meat grinder, hanging by his testicles like Saddam Hussein used to do to people he disliked? Is Floyd being held in a feces filled, windowless, eight-by-eight jail cell for months on end? Is he being tortured in an effort to get him to spill the beans on how doping is rampant in the pro cycling world? Get a grip Floyd. You exercise your right to free speech (continuously), you exercise your right to petition for redress of grievances (continuously), you exercise your right to pick a religion, peaceably assemble, vote in free and fair elections, you have not been deprived of life, liberty or property. In a nutshell Floyd, from the perspective of most of the people that populate this planet, you have the world by the tail. You are rich, famous and are free to pursue whatever kind of life that you want. You are shameless in suggesting that somehow you are being denied basic human rights. You wouldn't know the first thing about it. If you'd like to know what being denied human rights means maybe you should ask one of the millions (that's millions Floyd) of refugees in Pakistan, Somalia or the Sudan.

363402333_39b51e964e
Thanks to the Fairness Fund, Floyd Landis was able to get a bicycle and some basic food supplies.


Only in America can people cheat at something, lie about it and then, in effect, get a license to steal. Only in America do poor people feel sorry for the rich. And now, to bring his pathetic panhandling directly to the people of America, Landis is planning to, "hold town hall-style meetings in Southern California and across the nation where Landis will discuss his legal defense and raise money through auctions and by signing autographs" (read HERE). That's great; town hall-style meetings, where, like politicians, Landis can lie about his behavior and beg for money. Landis, like a good politician, knows that the public gets their information from the media and rarely do they delve into the actual facts surrounding an issue. So Landis will continue to spew his lies in an effort to get public opinion on his side in hopes of duping the public into sending money his way.

Finally, if Landis was truly innocent of the doping charges, and if he really was to make $8-10 million in endorsement deals plus $2.5 million in winnings, he could sell a stake in his earnings to an investment group. This happens all of the time. For example, if you are suing for financial damages you can sell, in advance of winning or settling the case, some or all of your potential income. The trick, of course, is to convince the investors that your story is true and that you are likely to prevail. With up to $12 million (Floyd's claim, read HERE) in potential income he could easily find suitors to fund his defense costs. If, and that's a big IF, he could convince someone, anyone, of his innocence. Under these arrangements Landis would have to share a percentage of this income with the investors. And that, I suppose, is the rub; Landis is obviously greedy and wants all of the money for himself, thus the begging instead of a market driven and value considered buy-sell arrangement. Still, and as a further service of elviskennedy.com, I'll provide to Landis links to two such organizations (HERE and HERE). Good luck Floyd.

__________________________________________________________________



To those of you who wonder why Landis would have taken testosterone instead of the usual EPO in anticipation of an epic ride, how about this for a theory on why Landis' blood had unusual amounts of testosterone; EPO, as you know, is a synthetic replacement for human blood and is used to boost performance by raising the amount of red blood cells to increase aerobic capacity. Let's say that the night before Landis' other worldly ride at the Tour de France Landis was given a bag or two of his own blood. This is an old-school (non-EPO) and classic method of blood doping. And let's say that the added blood was taken from Landis earlier in the year when he was taking synthetic testosterone for muscle building purposes, say, during February or March when he was in a training and muscle building stage. Is it possible that Landis and his doctors spent so much time calculating just how much blood they could add to his system without tripping any drug test red flags that they forgot that the blood was laced with remnants of synthetic testosterone? This could account for the unusual levels Landis had in his system and it would answer the question of why not EPO. Does this make any sense whatsoever? Hey, it's just a theory.

___________________________________________________________________



Beiserebatedor Lance Armstrong as baseball player


Baseball's Lance Armstrong, better known as Barry Bonds, has failed a drug test. Read HERE. Why is this item here in a cycling related blog? Well, in addition to the obviously parallel careers of Bonds and Armstrong (swell athletes at the beginning of their careers, superstars after drug use) you'll note other eery similarities. For example, both of these knuckle-heads are fond of saying, "I've never failed a drug test". They both claim to be the most tested athlete on the planet. This is malarky and both of these guys know it, and they also know that the statements get printed every time they are uttered. Useful to cast doubt. There is indisputable evidence that both of these guys took drugs in the past and they both used the same sorry excuse; someone (or everyone in Armstrong's case) is out to get them. For Lance it's the entire country of France, the laboratory that tampered with the testing system and ex-friends trying to extort money, for Bonds it was doctors and friends giving him things he thought were multi-vitamins. Armstrong has never fully answered why EPO was found in his blood from the 1999 Tour (see HERE) and Bonds has never fully answered the same types of questions (see HERE). Both guys claim problems with the testing system at the same time they both used sophisticated methods to manipulate that same system to avoid being caught.

Labels:

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Axis of Evil

Travel with me if you will to a time that we all remember well; October, 2001. We've just spent the last month gnashing our teeth and wiping our eyes and asking why. Why was America attacked? Will it happen again? We feel very vulnerable.

Now imagine that you are the President of the United States. You feel just like the rest of us but you also have the responsibility of trying to ensure that September 11th will never happen again. Then the unthinkable happens. The country's intelligence agencies come to you to report that they have credible evidence (from not just one independent source, but multiple, independent sources) that a suit cased sized nuclear bomb is in or on it's way to New York City. As it should, this frightens you and your colleagues like nothing else ever has, or could.

Now what? Do you go on national television and make this starling announcement? You can't. Such an announcement would trigger two things; 1) wide-spread panic, and 2) if the reports are true and there is such a device, the handlers will now detonate it without delay, knowing that U.S. intelligence is hot on their trail. So you do the only things that you can; place detection devices on bridges and tunnels leading into the city. Tighten security everywhere. Check every vehicle entering the city. Round up known radical Islamists for questioning. And pray.

You pray that you don't wake up one day to find that Manhattan is gone. And maybe other American cities too. So you make a decision with far-reaching consequences. You decide that the only way to secure the country and to prevent a nuclear catastrophe from happening is to take control of every nuclear device on the planet. Large and small. So you send your ambassadors and generals to every country that is known or suspected of having nuclear devices with an offer (and a threat). You ask each of these countries to allow the United States to inventory, secure and monitor (on an on-going and permanent basis) the nuclear devices. And if they say no, you tell them that you will be willing to use force, if necessary, to secure these devices. You are unwilling to allow these nuclear weapons to fall into the hands of Al Qaeda-type organizations.

Every country with the exception of Iran, Iraq and North Korea agree. The three belligerent countries become known as The Axis of Evil. They now represent the biggest threat to worldwide security and are run by leaders widely believed to be unstable individuals. Particularly Iraq, where Suddam Hussein has shown a remarkable propensity for killing for sport.

________________________________________________________________________________


All of the above is true. Did you know that? This should give you some insight to the on-going problems with Iraq, Iran and North Korea. And why we hear about them almost every day in the news.


800px-Axis_of_Evil_Map


The Iraq problem is well known. Hussein may have not had such weapons but he made every indication that he did. And he had proved time and again his willingness to engage or assist in the deaths of thousands. Would you, as President, having just had the bejesus scared out of you with the suitcase bomb scenario, do nothing? I sure hope not.

Iran and North Korea have been rattling their sabers for years now. I suspect that they don't yet have usable nuclear devices but are using the threat for two reasons. One, to focus the world's attention away from their human rights violations (the worst in the world). And two, as a bargaining chip for billions of dollars in "aid". You know, the money that the western world sends to these places to help the masses but most of which ends up in the hands of the dictators.


In any event, keep these facts in mind as you hear or read about Iraq, Iran and North Korea. The real reason that they are considered by the current administration to be evil, is that they are unwilling to allow the United States to secure their nuclear arsenals, whatever they may be. And that is simply unacceptable in the post-9/11 world.

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Worth a Thousand Words

BUYING A CAMERA TO TAKE ALONG ON YOUR BIKE

page9-1016-fullCIMG0517

Many of you have emailed me asking how I manage to take all of the pictures here at ElvisKennedy.com, especially the ones I take while on the bike. This article will address what camera to buy and how to use it when out cycling.

Point and shoot digital cameras. Has there ever been a product whose life cycle is so short? As recently as six months ago you could buy a camera and be sure that within a month or so it would be replaced with a newer, better and cheaper model. Not even PC's get replaced as fast as digital cameras. Has this got you down, bunko? Well I've got good news for you; the megapixel wars that drove camera development are over. That's right, buy a camera today and you will get years of use out of it without feeling that you made a mistake. This isn't to say that cameras won't improve or get cheaper because they will, but it won't happen nearly as fast.

The other piece of good news is that as this technology has matured and spread out almost any camera out there today will give you good pictures, with the only real differences in models being look, feel and features. I can almost hear you asking, "Hold on there Elvis, aren't the new 8 megapixel cameras twice as good as the 4 megapixel models?". In a word - no. The image sensor in almost every camera is exactly the same size. This sensor, (which records what you've got the camera pointed at - just like film did in 35mm days) contains tiny pixels that record data. When 1 million pixels where spread out (1 megapixel) on this sensor there was a lot of room in between the sweet spot of the pixels and this lead to less than stellar performance. Cameras improved dramatically as manufacturers were able to put more pixels onto the sensor. But a funny thing happened when they started putting (for marketing purposes) more than 6 or 7 million pixels on the sensor. In order to put so many pixels on a defined size they had to reduce the size of the pixels and at some point as the pixels shrunk in size - so did their quality. Camera companies knew that potential customers understood none of this and just thought that more megapixels meant a better picture. And these companies were naturally happy to have us all replacing our cameras every 6 months or so.

This is an oversimplification of course, and probably more information than you need but it serves to explain why almost any name brand camera that you buy in the 5-7 megapixel range will give you the ability to make a fine print for hanging on your wall or a lovely electronic image to email to grandma.

Great. Now that we know what megapixel size to focus on will the choice be easy? Unfortunately, no. There are literally hundreds of name brand cameras to choose from in the 5-7 megapixel range. So what else can we do to narrow our choices? Well, since we want to be able to use the camera while out cycling it needs to be on the smaller side. Sure, you could stuff one of the bigger cameras in your jersey pocket. These are all point & shoot cameras afterall, even the biggest one is small by 35mm SLR standards. Still, if it's not small, light, easy to get in and out of your pocket and easy to use - you just won't take it along. And that would defeat it's purpose.

What else are we looking for in a cycling camera? How about a big and bright screen? We'll be using this out in the bright sunshine and it would be nice to see what the camera is pointed at, wouldn't it? How about a lens that has a wide angle so that you can fit all of your cycling buddies into one shot without being a hundred yards out front? It also needs to have a so-called "dummy" or automatic mode. A setting whereby the camera does everything for you; focus, set the aperture, set the shutter speed, etc. (truly point and shoot). And you need to be able to use it successfully with one hand - safety first.

You also want a camera that does not use or need a lens cap. A lens cap is just something that will get in your way, affect your biking concentration (as you try to remove, keep track and replace it) and eventually get lost. A camera with a lens that retracts into the camera body when not in use is nice too. Easier to get it into and out of your pocket without a big lens 'nose' catching on everything.

3q-001Canon Powershot S2. Too bulky and requires a lens cap.

We've made some progress narrowing our choices. But what about brands? There are about 20 different brands that offer more than one camera that would fit out current list of needs. When I buy stuff I like to buy from companies in the business of making the products. What do I mean by this? As an example; Nikon is in the camera business. If they made a really crappy camera you'd never buy another Nikon camera. Which is to say that you'd never buy anything from Nikon. Plus, Nikon has decades of expertise in this business. Sony by contrast, isn't quite as concerned about making great cameras. They can still sell you a playstation, a computer, television, stereo, music CD's and so on. Sony, while they make fine digital cameras, aren't really in the camera business. I've got nothing against Sony it's just that we need to narrow our choices and sticking with companies that focus (note the pun) on photography is a smart choice. Along with eliminating Sony, we can eliminate Epson, Fuji, HP, JVC, Kodak, Kyocera, Panasonic, Samsung, Sanyo and Toshiba. Don't feel bad if you've already got a camera made by one of these companies, our purpose here is simply to narrow our search for the prospective buyer. The only exception here is Casio, a camera that I use frequently. Why the exception? Because it was the smallest camera that met all of the requirements outlined above at the time I bought it. It's the size and weight of a deck of cards. Most of the pictures you see here at ElvisKennedy.com come from this little gem. It's a proven performer.

inhand2Casio EX-750. 3.5 x 2.4 x 0.9 inches.

Of of the real camera companies; Canon, Contax, Konica-Minolta, Leica, Nikon, Olympus and Pentax, we can eliminate Konica-Minolta and Contax as being too esoteric and Leica for being too expensive. Olympus is a very fine camera company that gets eliminated because they force you to use a proprietary memory card (more expensive, not as readily available).

Let's review. What we want in a camera are the following specifications;

Between 5 and 7 megapixels
A screen at least 2 inches wide, and bright
Lens that retracts into the camera body and uses no lens cap
Has an "auto everything" mode
Wide angle of 40mm or less
Easy to turn on/off with one hand
Easy to take a picture with one hand
Smaller is better
Made by one of the following; Canon, Casio, Nikon, Pentax

The rest of the specifications that fill the sales brochures, things like; DIGIC III Image Processor, Face Detection Technology, Super Sport Mode, One Shot Easy Print Mode and the rest really don't matter. It's all just marketing B.S. Don't concern yourself with them.

We've made great progess. Each of the four companies recommended by ElvisKennedy have 5 to 10 cameras that will meet our needs. We've reduced our possible and confusing choice set from hundreds down to about 30. But 30 is still a lot and you could spend weeks or months reading the on-line reviews, getting confused with specifications, reading glowing sales brochures and listening to salespeople who really have no idea what they're talking about. Or, you could let Elvis Kennedy do the heavy lifting and just pick one of the four that he recommends.

Each of the four cameras recommended here meet all of the criteria we've discussed and each comes from a different price point so that you'll have a nice selection from which to choose.

All of these cameras have the following features (in addition to those outlined above) that Elvis Kennedy feels are important; built-in flash, movie mode, self-timer, rechargeable battery (save the Earth!).

___________________________________________________________________


elviscanonsd800Canon Powershot SD800

7.1 megapixels / 2.5 inch screen / 28mm wide lens - excellent (also zooms to 105mm) / 3.5 x 2.3 x 1 inch / 6.9 ounces / $369.00
Super camera that also features an image stabilizer (anti-shake)- great for those bumpy roads!
Read more and buy it HERE.

___________________________________________________________________


Optio T20.lgPentax Optio T20

7.1 megapixels / 3.0 inch screen / 37.5mm wide lens (also zooms to 112.5mm) / 3.7 x 2.3 x 0.8 inch / 5.5 ounces / $299.95
Big, 3 inch screen is nice.
Read more and buy it HERE.

___________________________________________________________________


casio_exs600_colors Casio Exilim EX-S600

6.0 megapixels / 2.2 inch screen / 38mm wide lens (also zooms to 114mm) / 3.5 x 2.3 x 0.6 inch / 4.4 ounces / $239.95
Also has an anti-shake feature. Smallest and lightest. Choice of colors.
Read more and buy it HERE.

___________________________________________________________________


25554_180 Nikon Coolpix S9

6.0 megapixels / 2.5 inch screen / 38mm wide lens (also zooms to 114mm) / 3.6 x 2.3 x 0.8 inch / 5.8 ounces / $209.95
Read more and buy it HERE.

___________________________________________________________________



For full disclosure; ElvisKennedy.com, unlike other sites, does NOT get a kick-back for referring readers to commercial sites. The on-line seller that Elvis recommends for all photography equipment is B&H in New York City. This is where the links for more info and to buy the cameras will take you. ElvisKennedy.com has been dealing with B&H for over 20 years. They are honest and they are legitimate. If you don't like something you purchase there, or you change your mind - return it for a full refund.

___________________________________________________________________



Here are some tips for using your new camera;

- Never push down on the shutter button. This motion will cause the camera to shake and the result will be a blurry picture. While your index finger is on the button, gently squeeze the camera between your index finger and your thumb (which is under the camera).

- Leave the lens at it's widest zoom setting. Not only will you get more of your cycling world on the picture, it's also the point at which most lenses offer the best quality imaging.

- Never use the 'digital zoom' settings. On or off the bike this is just a gimmick and will ruin your photos.

- Preset your camera to the auto mode so that you don't have to concern yourself with f-stops, shutter speeds and ISO settings. Off the bike you do worry about those things, don't you?

- Always have your camera set for the highest image quality. This will be under the picture/quality/resolution menu. Just set it for the biggest number or "Fine" or "High".

- Memory cards are cheap. Arm yourself with a 1 gig card and you will be able to take hundreds of photos. If you purchase by clicking on one of the links you can easily add a memory card to your order. Just browse the "Accessories" tab. Don't rely on the memory card provided with the camera. It's stupid small. Elvis Kennedy recommends that you get a 1 gig memory card. You could save 5 dollars by buying a smaller card but that would be silly. And if you stick with Sandisk or Lexar brands you won't have any trouble. This will add about $35.00 to your investment (if you buy on-line at ElvisKennedy's preferred vendor).

- Set the ISO (don't ask, doesn't matter) of your camera to 100 and leave it there. A higher number will add significant noise to your images.

- Play around with the video mode of these cameras. It's fun and easy, and you will (should) always have it with you since it's so portable. The quality is surprisingly high. Just look at THIS VIDEO shot on a bike with the little Casio. If you always have a little video camera handy you never know what you'll be able to do with it. Maybe you'll catch your boss doing something he/she shouldn't be doing. Then use the video to make one of two things; 1) yourself the boss after he/she gets fired, or 2) lots of blackmail money.

- When in video mode try not to do any zooming, and hold the camera still. Otherwise you'll get a crappy movie like that guy who recorded Saddam Hussein's hanging did. Pre-zoom for composition before hitting the record button and then hold the camera steady. It also helps if you refrain from chanting radical Islamic nonsense.

- In warm weather keep the camera in a little plastic baggy when on your bike. Otherwise it will get full of sweat.

- For heaven's sake - be careful! Especially if you try this while riding. Make sure that you practice operating the camera before taking it for a ride. Keep it in an easily accessible location. Have any settings set in advance. Pay attention to your cycling and your surroundings at all times. If you have to, guess by pointing your camera at it's intended target. Don't stare at the image screen (before or after shooting). You don't need perfect composition here.


CIMG0500
The Boss, about to put the hammer down.


- Here's what Elvis does to get a good shot while riding. But first, a disclaimer. Elvis Kennedy does not recommend that anyone attempt to take pictures while riding a bike. It's dangerous. Don't do it. Really. Elvis Kennedy will not be responsible for anything bad that happens to you. Or any one else. Ever.

Some have asked how Elvis does it and here goes (This is an outline of what Elvis sometimes carefully does, not a recommendation for what you should do. You want a recommendation? Don't do it.);

1) Have an idea of what photo you want before whipping out the camera. If you just pull it out and start shooting you're unlikely to get anything worthwhile and you'll be thinking about photography instead of cycling. A front or behind shot of your cycling buddies is almost always a good choice. Especially with cool scenery around.
2) Look ahead for a smooth, open and empty stretch of road. Slight downhill is good so that you don't have to pedal.
3) Make sure that you're steady on the bike and get your camera out. Since you've preset everything (you did, didn't you?) and since it's already on auto mode (because you paid attention to the earlier comments) all you need to do is turn it on.
4) Carefully position yourself for the shot.
5) Maintaining a steady position, bring the camera up, point it at your desired target and shoot. You can briefly glance at the display to get a rough idea of your framing but don't stare at it. Never forget that you're on a bike. Remember that you can crop and straighten your pictures at home on the computer easily and more safely than you can while riding.
6) Take multiple shots. Since the road is bumpy and you're guessing at framing take 3 or 4 shots. Your odds of getting something worthwhile will go up.
7) Turn the camera off and put it away.
8) If you're not comfortable taking pictures on the bike don't fret. Just ride ahead, get off your bike and take the shots of your buddies as they roll by. If the scenery is pretty - stop and smell the roses. Then take a picture.
9) Never do this in traffic, in town, in big groups, in races or with cyclists who would rather you didn't. Or anywhere else or in any manner that is unsafe.
10) Some of the best shots are pre and post ride.



Labels:

Monday, January 01, 2007

The Rider


The grey clouds rolled low, the wind came fast from the east and the temperature dropped but the rider rode on.

The rain beat down. The spray from his wheels traced a line on his back. Silently speeding through the countryside the rider rode on.

The rider was alone. No map, no route, no destination. Just to be on his bike, the rider rode on.

The rain came harder now but with no appointments to keep the rider rode on.

An abandoned farm house stood sentinel on a hillside. Splashing through rivulets of rainwater, with the joy being in the journey, the rider rode on.


kamket  3423 - Version 2 (1) Mile 10,379 - an abandoned farmhouse



Labels: