Thusly Boned

I really hate games in Arizona. The games are blacked out, horsefeathers always seems to go sideways, and I have to listen to Coomer wax moronic about it.

Or he strikes out. But regardless I'd certainly have preferred he or even Szczur.

They have literally done this exact double blind test many times and shown that for the majority of people, this simply isn't true. And for the ones who can tell a slight difference, it is only on the first drink, if taken neat, when their taste buds are sharpest, and if they're comparing a top shelf to the absolute lowest of the low quality. After one vodka, or if the vodka is mixed with anything at all, or if it's served cold, or if you're comparing to more middling brands...the results are the same as it would be with random guessing. I've drunk about 9 million gallons of vodka in my life, and I would absolutely agree. Get yourself a $15 bottle of vodka. It's just as good and you'll save a lot of money. I'm telling you with certainty that I could I could tell the difference on my 1st, 3rd, or 18th drink. While I'm eating an italian beef. I will admit that I could only do this when comparing top shelf to bottom shelf, though. I'm not going to claim that I can tell the difference between Belvidere and Grey Goose with 100% accuracy. This is a graph plotting vodka ratings (again, blind tests by an array of professional tasters) against the corresponding prices: http://i531.photobucket.com/albums/dd358/Cloudstrife219/vodka_quality_b_zpsw2ly0uuy.png That's zero correlation. There is, as you say, a "spectrum of quality", but it has no positive correlation with cost whatsoever. $10, $60, doesn't matter.

I don't really drink too much hard stuff so I can't comment, but I'm with you on the beer. Definitely different types of buzzes for different beers, and I'd like to think it's more than just the ABV. For me, Hopslam would give me the most different buzz from anything I've tried (compared to like, an imperial stout with the same ABV). And although it's not my cup of tea, hard cider gives a different winey type of buzz as well. I mean, enough of anything will get you drunk though. But I notice difference between mellow buzzes and energetic buzzes. Again, and I hate to agree with Careless, all completely due to the adjuncts in each type of booze and not the actual alcohol. There's no evidence that it's even that. Adjuncts, impurities and byproducts may influence hangover type effects, but there's no evidence that they impact your "buzz" at all. What research has been done on the subject strongly indicates that psychological factors are the overriding factor in the quality of your drunken state.

I hate when the Cubs play the DBacks, the games are totally blacked out here.

Can too. Yeah, it depends on the $8 bottle. Some vodka is better than others, but there is almost zero correlation with cost. Sometimes the quality is commensurate with the cost, but just as often it isn't at all. All of this is just to say that going into a store and choosing a bottle of booze under the assumption that "the more it costs the better it will be" is a very poor methodology. Unless you are choosing a specific brand based on rating, you might as well grab a bottle at random. Selecting top shelf because it's top shelf might make one feel like a refined fancy pants, but that's about it.

For the record, the "ratings and awards" I was referencing were from the San Francisco World Spirits Competition, Wine Enthusiast Magazine, and the Beverage Testing Institute. People whose opinions pale to CubbieSwagger's, I'm sure.

You are out of your mind. The fact that most average Joe's on the street can't tell the difference isn't science. Whatever helps you sleep at night, top shelf.

Any compelling evidence on the subject indicates that expectancy, mood and other psychosocial and psychosomatic factors are primarily what determines what "type" of drunk a person gets, not the quality (perceived or actual) of the drink. Poorly distilled alcohol can contain impurities like cogeners and non-ethyl alcohols (like methanol, propanol and butanol), and while these are (more) unhealthy, there's no empirical evidence that they affect the "type" of drunkenness in any way (though they may influence hangover). Controlled studies have been conducted where subjects were administered standardized doses of alcohol up to predetermined BAC level, and in these, the subjects have reported wildly different effects and levels of inebriation, almost all of which were consistent with how they expected to be affected. So if you believe that drinking only top shelf will lead to "purer" states of inebriation, then that's probably what you will find to be the case. But there's no compelling evidence to indicate that this is anything but placebo. This is one area where perception and expectation really do shape reality. And as far as quality (ratings, awards and such), data analysis shows that there is almost no correlation with cost (whiskey being a possible exception). So if you're ponying up for premium booze, you've been taken in by marketing, perception and snobbery (this doesn't apply nearly as much to beer, obviously).

Yeah, I saw that earlier and got a good laugh. I love how he tried to play it off.

It's hard to write off the Cardinals because they're essentially the Jason Voorhees of baseball, but unless they get another historic outlier of a performance from their pitching, they could finish at or below .500. They likely wouldn't admit it to the face of a Cubs fan (or themselves), but you can tell smart Cards fans detect the smell of death on this year's team.

One of the things I love about mlb.tv is being able to choose the feed. Also, I like how my console app bookmarks notable plays so you can skim through easily. I'll often watch the Cubs feed, then (if it's a win) skip from highlight to highlight of the opponent's feed for a little schadenfreude.

I've found it depends on how you're viewing it. 3rd party apps(Android, Roku, etc) typically have a delay of up to a full batter, while watching in a browser is pretty much real time. must be why I'm always delayed, as I always watch via my PS4 Yeah, the browser is more in sync, but it also has fewer features than the PS4 app.

Not always, but it is tonight.

I benched Richards yesterday and i think that he could be a Cy Young candidate. Yeah, Richards and Heaney aren't chopped liver by any stretch.

The ball doesn't carry all that well there at night, I think he thought it was going to go further than it did. So did I.

That works.

Simmons has absurd range.

Hail!

Al Hrabosky is an abomination. Objectively, it's kind of an embarrassment that he calls games for an organization like the Cards. He may be the worst color man in the game. If they broadcast games in hell, he and Hawk would be the team.

Also, Michael Wacha looks far less than spectacular. In and of itself, that means little. But he was pretty mediocre down the stretch last year, and also in ST this year.

A long time from now. but i want sole possession RIGHT NOW As much as I'd like to see the Cardinals lose every game, I'm reminding myself that them trading losses with the Pirates is probably for the best. In related news, Grichuk has struck out in 5 of his first 7 ABs this year. Seven ABs means nothing, but there's a lot of swing and miss in his game, and he has quite a bit of bust potential. That would be nice.

Zack Greinke got tuned up pretty well by the Rockies last night. I've heard some TV people predicting he wins the Cy Young this year, but I think he's going to markedly regress, especially moving from Dodger Stadium to Chase.

Of course this is the one night I have to work.

It could scarcely be a less inspiring opening night for Padres fans. At least they have a hit.