Zazzle Shop

Screen printing

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Tom Brady Is the Greatest Quarterback of All Time. Period.






Tom Brady Talks to Chuck Klosterman About Deflategate (Sort Of . . .)


tom-brady-gq-1215-11.jpg

Tom Brady Talks to Chuck Klosterman About Deflategate (Sort Of . . .)


Photographs by Inez + Vinoodh
Tom Brady is . . .
A) The greatest of all time
B) A slow man with a strong arm
C) A cheater
D) The quarterback we deserve
E) None of the above
F) Some of the above
G) All of the above. Chuck Klosterman provides the answer




Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback in NFL history.
That’s just my opinion, and that opinion is fungible. If someone else had made the same claim five years ago, I would have disagreed; five years ago, I didn’t even think he was the best quarterback of his generation. But the erosion of time has validated his ascension. Classifying Brady as the all-time best QB is not a universally held view, but it’s become the default response. His statistical legacy won’t match Peyton Manning’s, and Manning has changed the sport more. But Brady’s six Super Bowl appearances (and his dominance in their head-to-head matchups) tilt the scales of hagiography in his direction. He has been football’s most successful player at the game’s most demanding position, during an era when the importance of that position has been incessantly amplified. His greatness can be quantified through a wide range of objective metrics.
Yet it’s the subjective details that matter more.
America’s fanatical, perverse obsession with football is rooted in a multitude of smaller fixations, most notably the concept of who a quarterback is and what that person represents. There is no cultural corollary in any other sport. It’s the only position on the field a CEO would compare himself to, or a surgeon, or an actual general. It’s the only position in sports that racists still worry about. People who don’t care about football nevertheless understand that every clichéd story about high school involves the prom queen dating the quarterback. It serves as a signifier for a certain kind of elevated human, and Brady is that human in a non-metaphoric sense. He looks the way he’s supposed to look. He has the kind of wife he’s supposed to have. He has the right kind of inspirational backstory: a sixth-round draft pick who runs the 40-yard dash in a glacial 5.2 seconds, only to prove such things don’t matter because this job requires skills that can’t be reliably measured. Brady’s vocation demands an inexact combination of mental and physical faculties, and it all hinges on his teammates’ willingness to follow him unconditionally. This is part of the reason Brady does things like make cash payments to lowly practice-squad players who pick off his passes during scrimmages—he must embody the definition of leadership, almost like a president. In fact, it sometimes seems like Brady could eventually be president, or at least governor of Massachusetts.
But this will never happen.

When I ask if it’s something he’s ever considered, he responds as if I am crazy.

“There is a 0.000 chance of me ever wanting to do that,” says Brady. “I just think that no matter what you’d say or what you’d do, you’d be in a position where—you know, you’re politicking. You know? Like, I think the great part about what I do is that there’s a scoreboard. At the end of every week, you know how you did. You know how well you prepared. You know whether you executed your game plan. There’s a tangible score. I think in politics, half the people are gonna like you and half the people are not gonna like you, no matter what you do or what you say.… It’s like there are no right answers. If there were, everyone would choose the right answers. They’re all opinions.”
Had Brady given this quote as a rookie, it would have meant nothing. It would have scanned as a football player with relativist views on politics. But the events of the past year imbue these words with a stranger, deeper significance. After last season’s AFC Championship game, the Patriots were accused of deflating the footballs below the legal level. What initially appeared to be a bizarre allegation against a pair of anonymous locker-room employees spiraled into a massive scandal that seemed to go on forever, consistently painting Brady as the conversational equivalent of a Person of Interest. This even applied to his own coach, Bill Belichick. During an uncomfortable January 22 press conference, Belichick said, “Tom’s personal preferences on his footballs are something that he can talk about in much better detail than I could possibly provide. I can tell you that in my entire coaching career, I have never talked to any player, [or] staff member, about football air pressure.”


tom-brady-gq-1215-02.jpg
In May, Brady was suspended by the NFL for four games. He appealed the suspension and was re-instated in time for the opening of the 2015 season. Days later, an intensely reported ESPN The Magazine story outlined how the NFL bungled the Deflategate investigation and leaked false information to reporters. But the article was more damaging to the Patriots as an organization. It reported commissioner Roger Goodell purposefully over-penalized Brady and the Patriots on behalf of the other league owners, essentially as retribution for a decade of unproven institutional cheating (potentially including the first three New England Super Bowl victories, three games that were decided by a total of nine points).
Brady has never admitted any wrongdoing. He beat the suspension without conceding anything (and in the four games he was supposed to miss, he completed 73 percent of his passes for 11 touchdowns and zero interceptions). His résumé remains spotless. But things are different now, in a way that’s easy to recognize but hard to explain. Even though he’s said absolutely nothing of consequence in public, there is a sense that we now have a better understanding of who Tom Brady really is. And it’s the same person we thought he was before, except now we have to admit what that actually means. I’m interviewing Brady at a complicated point in his life. There are several things I want to ask him, almost all of which involve the same issue. I’m told Brady’s camp has agreed to a wide-ranging sit-down interview, where nothing will be off the table. The initial plan is for the meeting to happen in Boston, and it will be a lengthy conversation. Two days before I leave, Brady’s people say that the interview can’t happen face-to-face (and the explanation as to why is too weird to explain). It will now be a one-hour interview on the phone.
Brady calls me on a Tuesday. He’s driving somewhere and tells me he has only 45 minutes to talk. I ask a few questions about the unconventional trajectory of his career, particularly how it’s possible that a man who was never the best quarterback in the Big Ten could end up as a two-time league MVP as a pro. He doesn’t have a cogent answer, beyond classifying himself as a “late bloomer.” We talk about the 2007 Patriots squad that went 16-0, and I ask if wide receiver Randy Moss was the finest pure athlete he ever played with. He begrudgingly concedes that Moss was “the greatest vertical threat,” although he goes out of his way to compliment Wes Welker and Julian Edelman, too. He never brags and he’s never self-deprecating. He never offers any information that isn’t directly tied to the question that was posed. Everything receives a concise, non-controversial answer (including the aforementioned passage about his lack of political ambition). Realizing time is evaporating, I awkwardly move into the Deflategate material, citing the findings of the official report published by the NFL’s investigating attorney, Ted Wells.


tom-brady-gq-1215-03.jpg
The remainder of the interview lasts seven minutes.
There’s one element of the Wells Report that I find fascinating: The report concludes that you had a “general awareness” of the footballs being deflated. The report doesn’t say you were aware. It says you were generally aware. So I’m curious—would you say that categorization is accurate? I guess it depends on how you define the word generally. But was that categorization true or false?
[pause] I don’t really wanna talk about stuff like this. There are several reasons why. One is that it’s still ongoing. So I really don’t have much to say, because it’s—there’s still an appeal going on.
Oh, I realize that. But here’s the thing: If we don’t talk about this, the fact that you refused to talk about it will end up as the center of the story. I mean, how can you not respond to this question? It’s a pretty straightforward question.
I’ve had those questions for eight months and I’ve answered them, you know, multiple times for many different people, so—
I don’t think you have, really. When I ask, “Were you generally aware that this was happening,” what is the answer?
I’m not talking about that, because there’s still ongoing litigation. It has nothing to do with the personal question that you’re trying to ask, or the answer you’re trying to get. I’m not talking about anything as it relates to what’s happened over the last eight months. I’ve dealt with those questions for eight months. It’s something that—obviously I wish that we were talking about something different. But like I said, it’s still going on right now. And there’s nothing more that I really want to add to the subject. It’s been debated and talked about, especially in Boston, for a long time.


tom-brady-gq-1215-08.jpg
Do you feel what has happened over these eight months has changed the way the Patriots are perceived?
I don’t really care how the Patriots are perceived, truthfully. I really don’t. I really don’t. Look, if you’re a fan of our team, you root for us, you believe in our team, and you believe in what we’re trying to accomplish. If you’re not a fan of us, you have a different opinion.
But what you’re suggesting is that the reality of this is subjective. It’s not. Either you were “generally aware” of this or you weren’t.
I understand what you’re trying to get at. I think that my point is: I’m not adding any more to this debate. I’ve already said a lot about this—
Tom, you haven’t. I wouldn’t be asking these questions if you had. There’s still a lack of clarity on this.
Chuck, go read the transcript from a five-hour appeal hearing. It’s still ongoing.
I realize it’s still ongoing. But what is your concern? That by answering this question it will somehow—
I’ve already answered all those questions. I don’t want to keep revisiting what’s happened over the last eight months. Whether it’s you, whether it’s my parents, whether it’s anybody else. If that’s what you want to talk about, then it’s going to be a very short interview.


tom-brady-gq-1215-07.jpg
So you’re just not going to comment on any of this? About the idea of the balls being underinflated or any of the other accusations made against the Patriots regarding those first three Super Bowl victories? You have no comments on any of that?
Right now, in my current state in mid-October, dealing with the 2015 football season—I don’t have any interest in talking about those events as they relate to any type of distraction that they may bring to my team in 2015. I do not want to be a distraction to my football team. We’re in the middle of our season. I’m trying to do this as an interview that was asked of me, so… If you want to revisit everything and be another big distraction for our team, that’s not what I’m intending to do.
But if I ask you whether or not you were generally aware of something and you refuse to respond, any rational person is going to think you’re hiding something.
Chuck, I’ve answered those questions for many months. There is no—
Were you not informed by any of the people around you that these questions were going to be asked?
[sort of incredulously] No. I was—
No?
This is ongoing litigation.
Okay, well I appreciate you taking—
I appreciate it.
—the time to talk to me. Sorry, man.
Okay.


tom-brady-gq-1215-04.jpg
So what did Brady say during his June 23 appeal testimony, in response to a question about whether he authorized the deflation of the footballs? “Absolutely not.” When asked if he knew the footballs were being deflated (even if he never specifically requested that this happen), he said, “No.” This was the answer I obviously assumed he would give when I posed the same question to him in this interview. I did not think he would contradict any statement he gave under oath. But I still needed to establish that (seemingly predictable) denial as a baseline, in order to ask the questions I was much more interested in. Specifically…
• At what point did you become aware that people were accusing you of cheating?
• Do you (or did you) have any non-professional relationship with Jim McNally and John Jastremski, the Patriots employees at the crux of this controversy?
• Do you now concede some of the balls might have been below the legal limit, even if you had no idea this was happening? Or was the whole thing a total fiction?
• Do you believe negligibly deflated footballs would provide a meaningful competitive advantage, to you or to anyone else on the offense?
• How do you explain the Patriots’ fumble rate, which some claim is unrealistically low? Is that simply a bizarre coincidence?
• If you had no general awareness of any of this, do you feel like Bill Belichick pushed you under the bus during his January press conference? Were you hurt by this? Did it impact your relationship with him?


tom-brady-gq-1215-06.jpg
These questions shall remain unasked, simply because Brady refused to repeat a one-word response he claims to have given many times before. Now, I’m not a cop or a lawyer or a judge. I don’t have any classified information that can’t be found on the Internet. My opinion on this event has as much concrete value as my opinion on Brady’s quarterbacking, which is exactly zero. But I strongly suspect the real reason Brady did not want to answer a question about his “general awareness” of Deflategate is pretty uncomplicated: He doesn’t want to keep saying something that isn’t true, nor does he want to directly contradict what he said in the past. I realize that seems like a negative thing to conclude about someone I don’t know. It seems like I’m suggesting that he both cheated and lied, and technically I am.
But I’m on his side here, kind of. Yes, what Brady allegedly did would be unethical. It’s also what the world wants him to do. And that may seem paradoxical, because—in the heat of the moment, when faced with the specifics of a crime—consumers are programmed to express outrage and disbelief and self-righteous indignation. But Brady is doing the very thing that prompts athletes to be lionized; the only problem is the immediacy of the context. And that context will evolve, in the same direction it always does. Someday this media disaster will seem quaint.




The Oakland Raiders of the 1970s broke every rule they could, on and off the field, sometimes for no reason. They were successful and corrupt, and fans living outside the Bay Area hated what they represented. But nobody hates the ’70s Raiders now. In fact, we long for those teams, nostalgic for the era when their sublime villainy could thrive. It’s widely assumed Red Auerbach bugged the opponents’ locker room when he coached the Celtics, an illicit subterfuge retrospectively re-imagined as clever and industrious. When former Tar Heels basketball player Buzz Peterson talks about the greatness of his college roommate Michael Jordan, he sometimes recounts a story of the evening Jordan tried to cheat Peterson’s mother in a card game, an anecdote employed to reinforce how MJ was so supernaturally competitive that even middle-aged women got sliced. The defining memory of Kansas City Royals legend George Brett involves the illegal use of pine tar on his bat, an unambiguous infraction that was ultimately reversed on appeal, just like Brady’s suspension.
“I’m the pine-tar guy,” Brett would say years later. “And it’s not a bad thing to be remembered as.”
In the present, we overvalue the rules of sport and insist that anyone caught breaking ,those parameters must be stopped, sanctioned, and banned. But as the decades slip away, such responses tend to invert. Who won and who lost got hurt and nobody took drugs and nothing was fixed by gamblers, a little deception almost becomes charming. A deficiency of character adds character, somehow. It proves that the cheater cared.
The Patriots are the Raiders of now, despite the fact that the Raiders still exist. They push the limits of everything, and that’s how they dominate. Sometimes that limit-pushing is lawful and brilliant: When Belichick placed seven “eligible” receivers on the field against the Ravens in last season’s divisional playoff, it was a stroke of strategic genius. Sometimes that limit-pushing is (perhaps) significantly less than totally legal. But it’s all philosophically essential to what makes them who they are. They don’t need to cheat in order to win, but it certainly doesn’t hurt. I mean, how do rich people stay rich? By avoiding all the taxes specifically designed for rich people. How does a football franchise sustain a dynasty within an NFL system designed to instill parity? By attacking the boundaries of every rule in that system, at every level of the organization. And in both cases, the perception of those actions does not matter to the individuals involved. Perception is other people’s problem. Brady does not hide from this: “I don’t really care how the Patriots are perceived. I really don’t.”
There is nothing more attractive than a person who does not care if other people find him attractive.
These are all just games. Within the grand scheme of existence, they have no intrinsic value. A game can matter only as much as the involved players believe it to matter. This is why no one watches the Pro Bowl. It’s also what makes Brady di≠erent from normal people, and from other quarterbacks: He will do whatever it takes to win, regardless of what that win represents. He is, by definition, a winner. Which is what everyone has always said about him. We always knew this. He is precisely the man society demands him to be. It’s just that society doesn’t like to think about what that means in practice.
Before I asked Brady about Deflategate, I asked him about playing golf with Donald Trump. He explained how this is an amazing experience, and how you never really know what the actual score is, and that there’s always some sort of side bet, and that Trump always goes home with the money. I ask him if this means Trump cheats, as it’s hard to imagine how someone could always win, particularly since Golf Digest estimates Brady’s handicap as an 8.
“Nah,” says Brady. “He just—he doesn’t lose. He just doesn’t lose.”
The scoreboard is the scoreboard is the scoreboard. Everything else is just, like, your opinion, man.

Chuck Klosterman (@CKlosterman) is the author of eight books, most recently I Wear the Black Hat: Grappling with Villains (Real and Imagined).

Hasbro Now Has a Toy Line For Seniors Starting With a Lifelike Robotic Cat

From: http://toyland.gizmodo.com/
By: Andrew Liszewski
Hasbro Now Has a Toy Line For Seniors Starting With a Lifelike Robotic Cat

After already conquering demographics including kids, teenagers, and those technically considred adults, Hasbro is reaching out to that last frontier of consumers: seniors, with a new toy line featuring lifelike robotic companion pets that only need affection, not feeding or bathroom breaks.
The company’s new Joy For All line might sound a little depressing, almost like a robotic substitute for visiting your grandparents. But you grew up with Tamagotchis, Pokemon, and other virtual pets that never needed much maintenance; why shouldn’t your aging loved ones also be able to enjoy some virtual companionship too?
Hasbro Now Has a Toy Line For Seniors Starting With a Lifelike Robotic Cat
The first animal in the Joy For All line, the $99 Companion Pet Cat, is now available and comes packed with motion and light sensors so that it can realistically respond to being petted, held, and hugged. Hasbro hasn’t gone into too much detail about how it works, but the cat apparently has new vibration technology that allows it generate responsive purrs that both sound and feel incredibly realistic.
Hasbro Now Has a Toy Line For Seniors Starting With a Lifelike Robotic Cat
But it doesn’t just purr. Pet the companion cat on the head and it will automatically move it towards your hand, demanding more attention—or at least appearing to. And if you continuously pet its back, eventually it will roll over so you can give it a belly rub.
There’s no word on how long the cat will, well, live, on its included set of four C-sized batteries. But if left alone for a few minutes it will automatically close its eyes and fall asleep to help extend battery life for as long as possible.
Other companion animals are soon to follow in the Joy For All line, but Hasbro will have an even bigger hit on its hands as soon as it perfects a Companion Pet Grandchild with chubby cheeks perpetually in need of cleaning, a messy mop of hair that always needs straightening, and a genuine appreciation of hard candies. [Joy For All]
Hasbro Now Has a Toy Line For Seniors Starting With a Lifelike Robotic Cat
Hasbro Now Has a Toy Line For Seniors Starting With a Lifelike Robotic Cat
Hasbro Now Has a Toy Line For Seniors Starting With a Lifelike Robotic Cat

Whatever Happened to the Waterbed?


In the 70s, that swinging decade of key parties and shag carpets, waterbeds were the epitome of sexy. They were coveted by free-love hippies, randy bachelors and senior citizens alike. Playboy founder Hugh Hefner reportedly had two waterbeds, one clothed in green velvet, another in Tasmanian possum fur.
Kids today don’t remember them firsthand, but they’ve seen them featured in movies and even lampooned on SNL:

When waterbeds went mainstream in the 1980s, children pleaded for them:
And grandparents looked to them to cushion arthritic joints and relieve back pain:
By 1986, waterbeds made up 20 percent of the bed market and swelled to a $2 billion per year industry by 1989.

Was it really such a novel idea?

Not really. As it turns out, Hef’s marsupial mattress cover wasn’t far off from the first waterbeds. More than 3,000 years ago, ancient Persians filled goatskins with water and warmed them in the sun. No one is exactly sure about their earliest purpose, but speculation ranges from luxurious rest for royalty to comfort for the sick and elderly.
Waterbeds made their next appearance in the 70s and 80s. The 1870s and 1880s, that is. In 1832, Scottish physician Neil Arnott invented Dr. Arnott’s Hydrostatic or Floating Bed, filled with water to supportbedridden patients’ bodies evenly so as to prevent bedsores.
By 1871, when Mark Twain wrote an article for The New York Times about plans for Park Church in Elmira, NY, under the supervision of pastor Thomas Kennicott Beecher (brother to famous abolitionist and author Harriet Beecher Stowe), waterbeds had made their way to the United States. Twain reported that the church’s infirmary would have two “water-beds [for invalids whose pains will not allow them to lie on a less yielding substance]” and that the current waterbeds were “always in demand, and never out of service.”
When Sir James Paget introduced Arnott’s waterbed to St. Bartholomew Hospital in London in 1873, waterbeds were able to ride a wave of good PR. A decade later, Dr. William Hooper of Portsmouth, England, patented his version of the waterbed to treat arthritis and rheumatism patients.
Yet, because they didn’t offer a way to regulate the water temperature, they eventually fell out of fashion.

Who solved the temperature problem?

In 1968, a San Francisco State University student named Charles Hall created a mattress filled with water for his senior thesis project. More importantly, he found a practical way to heat it. Hall’s intention was to create comfortable furniture that would use heat to relieve muscle pain and the water flotation to reduce pressure points. But, as he told the New York Times, when he invited his classmates over to his Haight-Ashbury apartment for a demo, they ended up “frolicking” on his creation. And voila, man, a sex symbol was born.
In a Washington Post article, Hall shared his memories of a “typical early waterbed dealer” — a seedy fellow who also sold something called “orgy butter.” An early waterbed model advertised in Playboy called the Pleasure Pit, and it was “surrounded by leather and covered in furs.” The tagline of a 1970 waterbed ad read: “Two things are better on a waterbed. One of them is sleep.”

Hippies, figures. What about the east coast?

New York City was actually the worst market for waterbeds. One bedding retailer told the New York Timesin 1986 that New Yorkers were too “urbane” and “sophisticated” for the trend. But manufacturers blamed something else — restrictions by landlords and the impracticality of moving heavy, unwieldly bags of water into small apartments. That being said, while it was on display at Bloomingdale’s in Manhattan, the waterbed was, according to a 1971 Time article, reportedly a hot meeting place for hopeful singles.
Slow sales figures notwithstanding, waterbeds permeated popular culture from every side, from sitcoms toart installations. In a Whitney Museum of American Art catalog published in the mid-80s, architecture critic Martin Filler wrote that the waterbed was one of the “most evocative furniture types of the time.”
Someone who was less impressed with waterbeds? Pope John Paul II. On a 1987 visit to Miami, the pontiff declined to sleep on an archbishop’s waterbed, opting instead to rest his holy head on a traditional mattress.

So what happened?

As waterbeds went mainstream, they naturally became less hip. The selling points shifted from sex appeal totherapeutic purposes as doctors recommended them for older patients, and they were sometimes spotted in nursing homes.
At any rate, these behemoths had their shortcomings. Waterbed installation was a real pain in the ass. They are very heavy, their parts require maintenance; oftentimes they were left behind after a move since it was such a pain in the ass to drain the mattress. Occasionally, apartment renters were required to purchase waterbed insurance in case of leaks or damage.
Verified horror stories include collapsed balconiesworm infestations and a mattresses punctured by cats’ claws. Before Snopes (and the internet, for that matter), an urban legend circulated that water from a waterbed had put out a house fire while the occupants were away. In fact, it was the waterbed heater that started the fire in the first place.
Ultimately, the waterbed lost its appeal even as a therapeutic solution as new, lower-maintenance bedsdesigned for comfort became available.

Does anyone still buy them?

In recent years, waterbeds have accounted for less than five percent of the bed market. While many retailers no longer carry the beds or components, there are still plenty of waterbed specialty stores. And, of course, they’re available online
At the very least, there are still enough out there for this cat-meets-waterbed video compilation:

Overstock.com Has $10 Million In Gold And Silver Hidden Somewhere In Utah

from: http://consumerist.com/

The online retailer is hoarding gold and food to keep its employees paid and fed if the financial system collapses.

Ross D. Franklin / AP
Overstock is best known for selling discount merchandise online, but the company has another trick up its sleeve: It has hoarded food, cash, and digital currencies in preparation for a disaster scenario that could cripple lesser online retailers.
“I want a system that can survive a three-month freeze,” CEO Patrick Byrne told BuzzFeed News. “If the whole thing collapses I want our system to continue paying people, we want to be able to survive a shutdown of the banking system.”
The Utah-based company has made headlines in the past for its drawn out fight with hedge funds it accused of manipulating the company’s stock, and its CEO’s interest in digital currencies. Byrne said the company maintains a 30-day supply of food, and has a distribution system to pay and feed employees in case the banking and payments systems collapse.
“In the 1930s there was a two-week freeze on the banking system; in 2008 we came perilously close to banks not knowing who could accept counterparty risk,” Byrne said. “I think we’re living in the final days of the theory that the Keynesian magic money tree can deliver actual wealth and growth.”
In a call with anlaysts in early 2013, Byrne said the company is “determined to make Overstock robust in the face of that fragility and that includes owning some precious metals and maybe some Bitcoin.”
Hoarding precious metals can come with risks of its own. The company said in a recent regulatory filing that the value of its metals has been hit by the global decline in commodities prices — they’ve gone down to $10.2 million from $10.9 million at the end of last year.
“We’re not rubbing our hands together gleefully waiting for it to happen,” Byrne said. “We think of it as an insurance company with a 5% chance of paying off.”
While the precious metal store — $6 million of gold and $4.3 million of silver — has been noted in financial disclosures, the uncommon risk mitigation measure got renewed attention when the company’s former President Jonathan Johnson, who is running for governor of Utah, mentioned it in a speech to the United Precious Metals Association earlier this month. “I don’t know if it will be two days or two weeks or two months. But we have $10 million in gold and silver in denominations small enough … for payroll,” Johnson said.
The hoarding of coins and food may seem inconsistent with the company’s investment in financial instruments based on digital currency, but both come from Byrne’s doubts about the current way the world is run. “In a deep sense, I do not trust the central banks and I don’t trust major institutions.”
When asked exactly where the gold was — the company says it’s in an “off-site secure facility” — Byrne told BuzzFeed News, “It’s in a safe space in Utah. Utah has a lot of safe places.”
Matthew Zeitlin is a business reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in New York. Zeitlin reports on Wall Street and big banks.
Contact Matthew Zeitlin at matt.zeitlin@buzzfeed.com.

Master Lock: Opened w/a Plastic Zip Tie!

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Using Math To Win Guess Who 96% Of The Time


Mark Rober sorted out an easy way to almost-always win a game no one really plays anymore. It unclear if it still works if your opponent is also using this strategy.

Backyard UNDERGROUND Apocalyptic BUNKER



Published on Nov 17, 2015
It's finished and its amazing, the ultimate man cave and survival cell rolled into one sub garden room.
There are more things to add such as air filtration and different power source but it's a great space,

To see the build throughout its stages here are the previous 4 video's

Ep 1 https://youtu.be/8UKNajCgpEs
Ep 2 https://youtu.be/z8yiuJ9yFic
Ep 3 https://youtu.be/p1t7r3SKT2o
Ep 4 https://youtu.be/pR493Pee6Xo

Subscribe for more videos like this and thanks sky for making this possible.

More from Sky1 - http://www.sky.com/tv/channel/sky1Watch more from Sky1 - https://www.youtube.com/user/skyonezo... out more about the You, Me & The Apocalypse here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnFTb... Sky on Twitter @Sky1 #ApocalypseSky1
Watch You, Me and the Apocalypse - Wednesday at 9am,on Sky 1.Catch-up on the show on Sky On Demand.

Music is by "Heroic" a great band from sweden and the song is called
"when thoughts collide" more about them in the links below.

Website: www.heroicofficial.com
Spotify: https://play.spotify.com/album/164oRD...
  • Category

  • License

    • Standard YouTube License