Mmm! Mmm! Homemade Cupcakes!

Eric's birthday was last week, and I don't know of a bigger fan of the cupcake than Eric. Weeks ago I had bought a box of cake mix and a few jars of frosting with the idea that I would bake birthday cupcakes for him. But as his birthday neared, I figured I might rather attempt my first cupcakes from scratch. It was really very liberating to "bake outside of the box," and Eric thought they were very, very good.

It's not much to look at, but behold my very first homemade cupcake with homemade frosting:

Happy Birthday, Eric!

A quick post to wish my Eric a happy 33rd birthday!

Here's to many happy returns of the day.

Vote!

In case you've been living under a rock, you'll need no reminder that Tuesday, November 4th, is a very special day. It's not only my brother's 37th birthday. It's Election Day.


Please make sure you get out there and vote. You might even be so inclined as to Barack the Vote, but I'll leave it up to you to decide who the right candidate is. (Hint: His name kind of rhymes with Clock Mama.) Whoever you end up voting for (Barack Obama), please just make sure you exercise your constitutional right to vote.


Vote, and get all of your family and friends to vote.

Vote, vote, vote!

P.S. About 50% of those at Natural Log Squared officially endorse Senator Barack Obama for President.

Chef Eric

Since Eric is relatively new to cooking, he often finds recipes that he's curious to try. Two of my favorites of his were an almond-encrusted salmon he make for my birthday, and a chocolate cheesecake.

This time, he's asked whether I have the following ingredients:

Red pepper flakes
Dry white wine
Flat-leaf parsley
Fresh basil

Of course, these could be ingredients to just about any recipe. But I'm having fun wondering what he's got planned!

Autumn 2008

For the third straight year, Eric and I made our way to Wightmans Farm in Morristown. This year, we took with us our friends Nathaniel, Pei, and their son Alexander Preston.

The weather couldn't have been more perfect. The day included a hay ride, a pumpkin sling shot, pumpkin picking, and yummy snacks, including apple cider, apple pie, and donuts. And then a few more donuts.

The neat thing about Wightman's is their pumpkin sling shot. This is how it works: You place a baby pumpkin into the sling shot. Then, you try to shoot the pumpkin into one of the buckets off in the distance on a hill. Here's a picture of me getting ready to let go:


What makes the sling shot so special is that this was the third consecutive year that I managed to get the pumpkin into the bucket! The prize is a pumpkin, which we'll hopefully carve up this week.

Here are our friends Nathaniel, Pei, and Alexander Preston:


Here's Eric and me with Nathaniel and Pei's little Pumpkin:

Watch this space in October 2009 to see if I can make the pumpkin sling shot for a fourth time...

2008's First Pumpkin

In honor of our long-neglected blog, here's our first pumpkin of the year.

Baked ziti...yum yum

I'm not much of a cook but I do like to dabble here and there. Once we get a new kitchen, then I'm sure we will graduate to more complex dishes. But for now, I'm sticking with the comfort foods. The latest creation was baked ziti (very adventurous, as you can tell).

Ultimately, most pasta dishes are a combination of bread/pasta, tomato sauce, and cheese. From that perspective, baked ziti is really not that different from lasagna. Maybe that explains why everyone kept on asking for more "lasagna."

Whatever you call it...here is the recipe:

1 pound of uncooked ziti
1 1/2 tbps olive oil
1 small onion, chopped
1 tsp of minced rosemary
4 cloves of garlic, chopped
1/2 pounds of ground beef
1 jar (26 oz.) of spaghetti sauce
6 oz. of sliced provolone cheese
3/4 cup of cottage cheese
6 oz. of shredded mozzarella cheese (I love this stuff, so I put more in)
3/4 cup of sour cream (I didn't like it with the sour cream, so I would leave it out)

I was also going to throw in sliced Italian sausage but I forgot to include it! So I guess that is an optional ingredient. I also deliberately left out the parmesan cheese (gross!)

1. Cook the ziti and set it aside. I just boil it without any salt or oil.

2. Heat the olive oil in a large skillet and cook the onion. Then, throw in the rosemary and garlic, and mix well. Set aside in a small bowl.

3. Cook the ground beef (and sausage) in the skillet until cooked throughout. Then, stir in the onion mixture and spaghetti sauce. Reduce heat to low and let it simmer for 10 minutes.

4. Preheat the oven to 350F.

5. I line a baking dish with non-stock aluminum foil, so that the dish doesn't get caked with sauce and pasta. I spread a thin layer of sauce along the bottom of the dish. Then, I spread about half the pasta in the dish. Layer the provolone cheese, cottage cheese, and sour cream (if you so choose) on top of the pasta, and then top it with about half of the sauce. Then, layer the rest of the pasta, the remainder of the sauce, and the mozzarella cheese.

6. Bake everything uncovered for about 30 minutes. Since everything is already cooked in this recipe, you don't need to worry about exact cooking times.

As I mentioned, this is very simple. But is also pretty satisfying and makes great leftovers! I'm getting hungry just writing this...

Sunday In The Park With George

Earlier this week, we went to see the Roundabout Theatre Company's revival of the Broadway musical Sunday In The Park With George by Stephen Sondheim and James Lapine. For anyone who is not familiar with this show, it focuses on the artist Georges Suerat and his famous painting "A Sunday Afternoon On The Island Of La Grande Jatte". You may not be familiar with the artist or the title but you surely have seen the painting itself. The painting is currently on permanent display at the Art Institute of Chicago.

The show is a fictional imagination of the creation of the painting by Seurat himself (played by Daniel Evans) and some of the people that inspired some of the figures in the painting, including Seurat's fictional love interest, the cleverly-named 'Dot', played by Jenna Russell. Both actors are quite accomplished in London but "Sunday" represents their breakthrough in the US.

I had the opportunity to meet both Daniel Evans and Jenna Russell at a special event for the show. They were both extremely friendly and seemed genuinely interested in speaking with some of the fans of the show. They performed three songs from the show:

"Sunday In The Park With George" is the first number in the show and Dot is posing for George. In the painting, Dot is the woman on the right in the foreground. As Dot poses, she expresses frustration at George and his creative process.

In "Finishing The Hat", Seurat is alone with his unfinished painting. Dot has reached out to George but he has dismissed her in favor of his work. But he sings of missing Dot and how his work has enveloped his whole life.

"Move On" is from Act II of the show. This act takes place 100 years later and George's great-grandson (also named George) is also an artist but is working with technology. While visiting the Island of La Grande Jatte, the setting of famous painting, younger George has a vision of Dot who tells him to stop worrying about what people think of his art or the commercial prospects for his work, and focus on creating art for himself -- just as his great-grandfather did 100 years ago. In this number, it helps to know that the real Seurat never sold a painting and died at the age of 31.

Also included is a clip from Good Morning America where Stephen Sondheim himself and James Lapine discussed the show with Diane Sawyer.

As you can clearly see from the clips, Daniel Evans and Jenna Russell are remarkable talents and seem to share genuine chemistry together, which gives added depth to the strained relationship between George and Dot, as well as gives richness to the painting itself.

And the special effects used in the show are as good as I have ever seen on Broadway. The show creates the "canvas" of the painting with lighting effects and video that illustrate the evolution of the painting. As George erases from his sketchpad, the "canvas" on stage gets erased as well. At one point, there are four "Georges" on the stage at once and the "real" George pours champagne into the simulated glass of one of the simulated Georges. Truly incredible work.

Even though the show is fiction, seeing some of the (possible) inspirations of some of figures in the painting creates an added dimension to the work. Now the painting almost seems to be a 3D world where the figures interact with each other and with the viewer. As a non-artist, "Sunday" gave me a look into the kind of single-minded focus and dedication that is required to create such an iconic work.

This is yet another link in our expanding connection with the movie "Ferris Bueller's Day Off". We have met both stars of the movie, Matthew Broderick and Alan Ruck, and now we have seen the painting in that hysterical scene in the movie. Maybe we'll meet the members of Yello next...

Deal Or No Deal...The Ultimate Game?

Back in March, Mary Beth Holtzheimer (sorry if I misspelled your name) ran a nearly perfect game on Deal Or No Deal. Check out the video to see what happened.

First of all, that is the great poker player Annie Duke who is advising Mary Beth. And Annie is exactly right in her assessment of the game. With $25, $500K, and $1M cases still in play, and an offer of $404K on the table, there are three possibilities if she chooses to play on.

1. She opens up the $25 case. Then, with the $500K and $1M cases remaining, you would expect the Banker's offer to be somewhere around $750,000.
2. She opens up the $500K case. Then, with the $25 and $1M cases remaining, you would expect the Banker's offer to be somewhere around $500,000.
3. She opens up the $1M case. Then, with the $25 and $500K cases remaining, you would expect the Banker's offer to be somewhere around $250,000.

Based on this assessment, two out of the three outcomes would result in an offer higher than the current offer of $404,000. The only outcome where the offer would decrease would result in an offer of $250,000. So, this analysis suggests that the minimum possible outcomes is $250,000. At this point, my recommendation would have been to reject the offer and continue in the game.

As you can see from the video, Mary Beth did continue and she eliminated the $500K case. But the offer came in at only $341,000. What gives? The answer lies is basic financial theory.

Generally, most people tend to prefer a sure thing over taking a chance. In the case (haha) of DoND, most players prefer taking a guaranteed and immediate sum (i.e., the offer) over taking a risk to win an unknown and future amount. This concept is known as the "time value of money" and is one of the cornerstones of modern financial theory.

The amount by which one person prefers the sure thing over the gamble is known as the "discount rate". Obviously, the amount of the discount rate varies according to many factors, one of which is the individual's risk tolerance. People who are more cautious are more likely to place a higher value on an immediate and guaranteed amount, thus they have a higher discount rate.

To illustrate this point, consider Mary Beth's situation where there are only two cases remaining ($25 and $1 million). Now consider someone who had no preference between taking the guaranteed sum and taking a risk (i.e., their discount rate is zero). For such a person, their expected value of the two cases would be slightly less than $500,000. Assuming that someone's discount rate cannot be negative, then this hypothetical person would refuse any offer that was below that amount.

An analysis of past games shows that the offers that are accepted by the players tend to be 91% of the average of the remaining cases. That suggests that most people place a higher value on the guaranteed offer over the unknown risk (a discount rate of 9%).

Presumably, as the stakes get higher, people's risk tolerance tends to change. Between a choice of $25 and $100, most people probably wouldn't care much (i.e., the discount rate tends to be lower). But between a choice of $25 and $1 million, most people would probably become very cautious out of fear of losing the top prize (i.e., the discount rate tends to be higher).

The offer of $341,000 implies a discount rate of almost 32%, which suggests that the Banker believes there is a strong preference toward the guaranteed sum. Clearly, the Banker was correct as Mary Beth (wisely) took the offer.

If Mary Beth's discount rate was lower than 32%, then she would not have accepted the offer. Another way of saying this is that if Mary Beth would choose the guaranteed sum over the unknown sum less than 2 out of 3 times, then she would not take the offer. Obviously, nobody knows what their exact discount rate is but most people do have a gut feeling about their preference between a sure thing and taking a chance.

Of course, it turned out that she was one of only two players to have ever chose the Million Dollar Case. There is only a 3.8% chance of that occurring, so Mary Beth clearly beat the odds.

This was an incredibly exciting game. The "ideal" game in terms of having the most drama would probably be a situation where a contestant had the $1 million case and the $0.01 case remaining. This came pretty close!

Who is a Jeopardy cheater?

On last Thursday's Jeopardy, something very strange happened. As you can see from the clip, Paul (in the 2nd position) claimed that his electronic pen failed during Final Jeopardy and he could not write down his response. As per Alex's instructions, he used the backup pen and paper. He ended up with the correct response and wagered enough to win the game and beat Tom who was the defending champion. Roll credits and show over.

Well, the story does not end there. If you watched the show on Friday, you would have noticed that both Tom and Paul were both back.

Jeopardy takes the integrity of its show very seriously and does not want there to be any uncertainty about its clues, the responses, or the rules. Apparently, the producers conferred in between tapings and determined that Tom may have been at a disadvantage because of the extra time that Paul was given to write his response. If you watch the clip, Paul is given at least 10 extra seconds, which can make a big difference considering that the Final Jeopardy time is 30 seconds. So, it was decided that the fairest way to resolve this was to invite both players back for a rematch, which Tom won decisively.

But the story does not end there either. The big question is why didn't Paul just write down his response on the card within the 30 seconds? If he had done so, then there would be no dispute about giving one player an advantage over another.

Paul has addressed what happened on the Jeopardy message board. He concedes that there may have indeed been nothing wrong with the pen itself and that he may have caused it to malfunction by leaning against the electronic screen and they were even warned not to do so during the pre-taping instructions -- you would think Jeopardy would be able to spring for better technology!

He also concedes that they were explicitly told before the taping that the pen and paper should be used in the event of a malfunction. But Paul claims that he interpreted the instructions to require that he wait until he is told directly to use the pen and paper, hence the reason he waited until the end of the 30 second time limit to write his response.

He also claims that Tom (the defending champion who lost in the disputed game) raised a stink about the outcome and claimed that he was cheated. For the record, Tom denies making any remarks about the game until after the decision was made and indicated that he didn't even have the opportunity to do so.

But what really seems to be a sore point for Paul is that all this talk about the possibility of cheating in the 1st game was very unnerving and put him at a disadvantage in the 2nd game (the rematch). He suggests that he could have won that game without this dark cloud hanging over everything.

Contestants have had to resort to the pen and paper to write their response, so this is not a first-time occurrence. But (to my knowledge) every contestant in that situation did so within the 30-second time limit. This suggests to me that the contestants are told pretty clearly that the pen and paper are there if the electronic pen does not work. If that is the case, then I believe that Paul was given an unfair advantage and Tom should be declared the winner. Paul was given over 10 extra seconds which is a 33% increase in time that everyone else received, which is definitely an advantage.

But if Paul's was led to believe that he should wait until a clear signal to use the pen and paper, then this is the fault of the show and Paul should not be penalized.

With some possible doubt about how the instructions were given, I agree with the producers' decision to bring back both contestants and give them another shot. The alternative would have been to throw out the Final Jeopardy question entirely and do another one. But in these cases, Paul was right to think the contestants should be given some breathing time to allow them to regain their composure.

Like sports, contests, and games of all kinds, game shows rely on the integrity of the game itself. Once the rules start bending a bit, then you open up all kinds of accusations and possibilities of cheating, favoritism, and other ugly scenes. Jeopardy handled this situation as best they could and still kept the game intact.

A Weekend In Washington, D.C.

Eric and I recently descended upon Washington, D.C., to behold the cherry blossoms! We arrived during the first weekend of the festival (the last weekend of March) so we were able to see the blossoms in full bloom, along with probably tens of thousands of others from across the country (and possibly further).

The trees were so beautiful, and almost overwhelming in number. They completely lined the perimeter of the Potomac, and Eric took some really beautiful pictures. (In the case where Eric is in the pictures with me, the photo credit belongs to a kind passer-by.)

The Washington Monument:

We got to see most of the major memorials of past presidents, including the Lincoln...

the Washington...

the Jefferson...

and the Roosevelt.

Eric and I struck a pose with a gentleman whose name I have inconveniently forgotten. I think it was George someone. Or Thomas, maybe.

At the National Portrait Gallery, we saw the infamous Stephen Colbert portrait.

We saw the major monuments, including the Capitol Building and the White House. (Eric gets a kick out of posing me in goofy postures; this first one was NOT my idea!) I look like I belong in a WWII poster!

We learned from the Secret Service officer guarding the front of the White House (pictured below is the back) that this evening, the First Lady was hosting a high school reunion. If you click on the photo below, you'll see a larger version and can probably make out a 1964 banner just above the center archway. That's the year Laura Bush graduated from high school.

And, of course, some pictures of us at the White House...

and outside of the Jefferson Memorial.

We did a tremendous amount of walking in two days' time, and it made us realize how very tired our bodies can get! We really had a great time... it was a fantastic trip. The weather was nice, if a little cold, and the drive down and back was pleasant and easy. (Particularly for me, since I was the passenger!) Ask Eric about the side stop we made on the way home...

Are You LinkedIn?

It was a few years ago when I first signed up with LinkedIn. At the recommendation of a colleague, I signed up, created a profile, and conveniently forgot about it. Lately, however, the site seems to have experienced a surge in popularity, and I'm all of a sudden finding myself with lots of connections!

If you're not familiar with it, LinkedIn is a professional networking site that allows you to connect with people you work with (or used to work with) or those you went to school with. You can browse your contacts' professional contacts, search for people, and so on and so forth. It's a great tool for people who are looking for a job, but it's also helpful for people like me who are completely satisfied in their work and who aren't looking to change.

For example, they have a section called Answers, and you can use it to browse questions other professionals have asked. You can read them, answer them, or post questions of your own. I've found the Charity & Non-Profit section to be extremely helpful, and I've posted and answered some questions myself. (You may need to have an account to visit these links. If not, it's easy and it's free, and you can sign up here.)

Give it a look. You may find an old friend, an old colleague, a new job, a new friend, or some valuable answers. And you may even find Eric and me.

Hillary just can't catch a break

The news of the Eliot Spitzer scandal has been a hot topic of conversation for those in my office. Not only are we located in New York but we are heavily involved in the financial industry. In fact, some of my colleagues know others who were directly affected by the Governor's crackdown on Wall Street. I spoke with quite a few people in the industry and there does not appear to be many tears shed for the Luv Guv.

But one (unexpected) impact of this imbroglio is in the race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. It turns out that Eliot Spitzer and Governor-to-be David Paterson are both superdelgates in the Democractic party. In fact, any Democrat who holds the offices of Governor and Lieutenant Governor in New York are superdelgates. Since Spitzer resigned the office of Governor, he also loses his vote as a superdelegate.

Both Eliot Spitzer and David Paterson have pledged their votes to Hillary Clinton. She will lose Spitzer's vote as a superdelegate but retain Paterson's vote as he becomes Governor. But guess who moves into the role of Lieutenant Governor? Joe Bruno, who is currently the leader of the State Senate...and a Republican.

In a nomination race where every delegate is like gold, it sure seems like Hillary can't catch a break.

Federer vs. Sampras

This past Monday, we were two of 19,000 lucky tennis fans who got to see a battle of the Champions -- an exhibition match between Roger Federer and Pete Sampras at Madison Square Garden. Even better, we got the prime view from seats in one of the luxury boxes, which is undoubtedly the only way to be at the Garden.

Check out our view. Donald Trump was a few boxes down from us. Tiger Woods and his wife, and Roger's girlfriend and parents were right below us.


The match was billed as "Good vs. Evil" -- perhaps not quite jokingly, as Roger (dressed in menacing black) came out to Darth Vader march, whereas Pete (decked out in his tennis whites) made his entrance to the theme from Superman. It was definitely a treat to see these two extraordinary players go head-to-head, although it really is not a fair comparison. Roger is pretty close to the top of his game right now (his bout with mono notwithstanding) and Pete is over five years into retirement. The game has changed pretty significantly since Pete's dominant days -- his serve-and-volley style was almost jarring to watch since we are all used to seeing players camp out on the baseline. Pete definitely looked like he had lost a step or two over the years.

But Roger is well known for being a class-act and someone who respects the history of tennis. My suspicion was that Roger was not going to embarass Pete if the match was turning lopsided. Roger is an amazing talent on-court, and he has the ability to dial down his play just enough to allow another players a good showing. There were several times when it seemed like Roger was holding back just a bit. That made for a good show (see the score) but it also made the match seem somewhat "manufactured". Even with an exhibition, there is a sense (or a hope) that the players are going to play to win, even if they don't give 100%.

The Garden has not hosted tennis matches on a regular basis for several years and I don't think it is a very good venue for the sport. The acoustics of the arena seem to be more suitable for noisy events (such as hockey, basketball, and concerts) but that does not work well with tennis. The arena is not very big and our box was not that far off the court, yet we had a lot of trouble hear the ball come off the racket and even the line calls. Also, the Garden tried to work up the crowd by using a lot of the same techniques used in basketball games, which seems inappropriate and out of place at a tennis match.

Even still, this was a very special treat to see these two players hit around. Roger and Pete gave a good show and the crowd (including myself) ate it up. It is almost poetic that the only time these two played each other in an actual tournament was in the fourth round at Wimbledon in 2001, where Roger won in a very close five sets (7-6, 5-7, 6-4, 6-7, 7-5). In fact, after the match at the Garden, Pete hinted that their next exhibition may be on the lawns of Wimbledon. With 12 of the last 15 Wimbledon titles between the them, that would truly be a special match.

Global warming? Bet on it.

While global warming may have only become a popular issue in 2006 with the release of An Inconvenient Truth with Al Gore, the citizens of a tiny town in Alaska have been watching (and betting) on global warming for a lot longer than that.

Since 1917, the town of Nenana, Alaska (population 402), which is about 55 miles southwest of Fairbanks, has sponsored the Nenana Ice Classic. This is a lottery where participants wager on the exact moment when the ice breaks up on the Tenana River. Every year, you can buy a ticket for $2.50 and put your money on the exact date and time when the ice will break up, which indicates the unofficial start of spring. Last year, 22 people won and shared a jackpot of over $300,000.

The break-up of the ice is measured using the Nenana Tripod, which is a 26-foot tall pyramid of spruce logs that are anchored into the ice. When the ice breaks up, the tripod (which actually has four legs) will collapse and trigger a trip wire which will stop the clock.

By happenstance, the Nenana Ice Classic offers a rare opportunity for scientists to measure the acceleration of global warming over the 20th century by measuring how the winning times have shifted over the past 90 years. In fact, the winning time has occured almost 10 days earlier since 1960.

No instruments, no fancy equipment, no big movie deals, just a small town that has seen their backyard change a little bit every year.

An Unauthorized Fan

My video of the big Million Dollar Winnner on last week's TPIR Million Dollar Spectacular was taken down by YouTube for copyright infringement. I'm sure this comes directly from CBS, which clearly wants viewers to go to its own online video site that streams episodes of TPIR (including the MDS).

I'm not really upset about CBS's actions but it seems to be short-sighted. Does anyone really think that my video represents an alternative means of viewing TPIR that draws viewers away from CBS's own site? Another way of asking the question is that would anyone who is looking to watch TPIR consider my six-minute video to be a substitute for the real thing?

I'm sure some people will be perfectly happy watching Super Bowl highlights on SportsCenter instead of the real thing. I'm sure some people will just chapter skip to the last ten minutes of No Country For Old Men and consider the movie to have been viewed. I'm sure some people tune into TPIR just watch the Showcase and then turn to something else.

But are these really the kinds of viewers that CBS is looking to attract to its site? Are these the viewers that advertisers pay millions of dollars to reach? Does anyone really believe that anyone who only wants to watch the Showcases is going to sit through an entire hour-long episode?

Rather that view these clips as competition, CBS and other media companies should treat them in a similar way as fan sites, which is to say the are a means to promote the show, galvanize the fan base, and generate buzz and discussion. It may even attract new viewers to the show who may stumble upon these cliips and be interested to see more.

Clearly, I'm just a fan of the show and I'm not looking to make any money or gain recognition by sharing my interests. But since CBS does not want me to post videos of TPIR without authorization, I guess that makes me An Unauthorized Fan. But is that the kind of person CBS really wants to go after for copyright infringement?

The Price Is Right Million Dollar Spectacular

As everyone undoubtedly saw tonight, someone hit the big jackpot on The Price Is Right Million Dollar Spectacular. Check out the Million Dollar Moment. Very exciting!!

These Million Dollar Spectaculars were originally started during the Bob Barker era and were an attempt for TPIR to gain some traction in prime time. It was an uphill struggle, since previous iterations of the show have not translated well into the evening hours (see Doug Davidson). Also, the MDS shows allowed TPIR to compete with other big money game shows. It was tough for a show like TPIR to increase the prize amounts because you can't exactly give away a $100,000 car.

The MDS shows have done a better job over time with how they integrated the million dollars into the show. Tonight's format worked very well -- having a "hidden" million-dollar prize during one of the games is a nice touch. And, offering the million dollars to any Double Showcase Winner really brings the show back to the old days when winning both Showcases was an ENORMOUS deal.

Drew Carey did a better job as host tonight. I think he is slowly getting used to the complexities and nuances of a hosting a show like this. He still needs to do a better job pacing the show. There are situations where he rushes through the games and the show loses a lot of suspense and excitement. There are other times when he tries to build up the moment but it doesn't quite work on TV (e.g., holding hands and "a-la-Kazaam"). Drew also speaks far too quickly, which is a problem when you consider that a big chunk of the viewing audience are senior citizens (hence, those Liberty Medical commericals).

And, Drew needs to show more empathy for the contestants. I'm sure working in television is much less glamorous and exciting (maybe even mundane) than it is for the viewers. But the fans often have an intense personal interest in the show and it is a once-in-a-lifetime experience for the contestants. One way to "connect" with the viewers and contestants is to experience the highs and lows of the game with them, just as some of the best sportscasters cheer and groan along with the fans at home.

I think Drew will find his rhythm as host with time and experience. Being a host is a much tougher job than most people assume (partly because some of the best emcees do it so well and make it look so easy). Drew did a good job tonight and the Million Dollar Moment was everything it should have been.

And check out my fellow TPIR fans on Golden-Road.net for more stuff about TPIR than you ever knew existed :)

'Company' on PBS

On Wednesday, Feb. 20, PBS's Great Performances series will showcase the 2006 Broadway revival of Stephen Sondheim's 'Company' starring Raul Esparza and directed by John Doyle. In what has become John Doyle's signature style, all the actors also served as the orchestra and played all their own instruments. John won the 2005 Tony Award for Best Director of a Musical for employing a similar style in the Broadway revival of 'Sweeney Todd'.

I thought the "triple-threat" of actor-musician-singer didn't work as well in 'Company' as it did in 'Sweeney Todd'. One of the drawbacks of using actors as musicians is that you reduce the ability to use wind instruments, as the actors need to keep their voices free for singing and speaking. This did not work as well with the music in 'Company' which benefits from having a more complete orchestra (winds included). Also, it was a bit unwieldly to have the actors roam around the stage with their instruments, especially poor Fred Rose who had to roll around with that cello. But I thought this was an excellent revival with outstanding actors. I especially liked the modern, New York-ish set design and lighting.

During the run of the show, the entire company of 'Company' was on hand to promote the cast album and the performed three songs from the show (Barbara Walsh performing "Ladies Who Lunch"; Angel Desai, Elizabeth Stanley, Kelly Jeanne Grant performing "You Could Drive A Person Crazy"; and the great Raul Esparza performing "Marry Me A Little"). You can view those performances on our YouTube site.

$35?! What kind of show do you think this is?

The funny part about the situation with the Jeopardy game is that check out some the reviews of this game. Apparently, the game is more fun when it is broken.

"I'll Take a Piece of Junk for $35, Alex."

We learned the hard way that it doesn't always pay to do your Christmas shopping early.

Last summer, during a walk through a large technology superstore which shall remain nameless, Eric spied a play-at-home version of one of his favorite game shows—Jeopardy! As he inspected the box I could see the wheels grinding in his brain as he fantasized about night after night of "true daily doubles" and answers in the form of questions. After a few minutes we decided that the price was much too high, and as we walked away I saw a little tear in Eric's eye. (No, not really, but it added a little drama to the tale, didn't it?)


In September, after we won a $20 gift card to said large technology superstore, I stopped in to see whether the game had gone on sale. There was one copy left, and it was marked 50% off. I was thrilled! I bought it, wrapped it, and stashed it away where curious eyes couldn't see it.

Fast forward to December, and Eric is so excited about the present that we open it immediately. His joy turned very quickly to disappointment when we discovered how "cheap" the game actually was. It looked of very low quality, and what's worse is that after 45 minutes of setting it up, it didn't even work!

The date of purchase was September 07, 2007, and the store's return policy is 30 days. We went to the store last night to try to make a plea, and one manager was kind enough to say she'd offer us store credit if the game was still in their system. Alas, it was not. "Try to contact the manufacturer," she said. Sadly, that's retail-speak for "tough luck, kid." Should have buzzed in sooner. Or purchased this version:


The moral of the story? Don't shop too early!

Anybody want to buy a broken—er, gently used—Jeopardy! game?

Chili... Yum!

As I type this, I've got one large, chopped onion sauteeing on my stove. I'm making vegetarian chili, minus the beef. The recipe calls for vegetarian beef crumbles, but since the supermarket had only vegetarian sausage crumbles, I'm going to try that. I've made this recipe before, but with fake beef. Hopefully, the sausage will give it a nice variation.


If you want to try it yourself, here's the recipe. Better go before my neighbors call the fire department. :)

Update: Yum! Here's what all my work produced:


I love it. It definitely doesn't taste like traditional chili, but it's a much healthier alternative if you're trying to limit your meat intake or avoid it altogether. Eric gets to test it tomorrow, the lucky bean.

Pity Poor Eric

So sad. Our poor Eric has been fighting a cough for a few weeks now. Earlier today I stopped by to drop off a care package that included fresh mango, low-sugar brownies, cough drops, a get-well card, and two Dark Chocolate Milky Way bars (so much for the low-sugar brownies). Eric (the poor bean) looked terrible, though he managed to muster a smile or three. I didn't stay, because I didn't want to take whatever it was he came down with. But it was nice to see him. :)

If you're so inclined, send Eric some well wishes. Poor thing.

Super Parade for Super Giants

Hello to whoever is actually reading this :)

Today was the ticker-tape parade for the NY Giants to celebrate their incredible victory over the much-maligned New England PatriotsSuper Bowl XLII. This was a big deal here in NY because everyone hates the Patriots around here. Also, there has not been a ticker-tape parade in NY since 2000, when the won the World Series.

I have never been to a ticker-tape parade before, so I was very curious to see what it was like. I was expecting something similar to New Year’s Eve in Times Square. Luckily, my office building is right along the parade route, so I didn’t even have to go outside (and brave the drizzle) to enjoy the festivities. Here are some of the pictures I took today.

We've Gone Technological!

We're thrilled to announce that we've decided to join the 21st century and start a blog! Of course, we realize that you're all very busy and important and that you may not have the time or even the inclination to read about our goings-on. But, because it's free, we've decided to give it a go.

We're glad to welcome any comments you might have. Enjoy!