Blogging since 1998. By David Wertheimer

Category: Observed (Page 14 of 24)

On spending four days in Chicago

A handful of (rather mundane, my apologies) observations:

• This town, at least in the area I’m in, is clean, comfortable, and gorgeous. I love the abundant architecture—unlike New York, Chicago seems to embrace every era of skyscraper style, and the overall effect is terrific. Art deco next to modernism next to a soon-to-be Trump tower on the river. Great.

• I’m not used to how wide the streets are, and how few cars are street-parked in the Loop and Magnificent Mile. Compared to Manhattan the place almost feels empty.

• Lots of good food: I have enjoyed Italian sausage and a Blackie burger thus far and am trying Ben Pao Chinese tonight. Which is a good thing, because the Hyatt’s convention center food is really quite awful.

• The Windy City ain’t windy when I’m in town: high 70’s and lots of sun all week. You’re welcome, Chicago.

FishyAnd to top it all off, my hotel, the Monaco Chicago, provides a complimentary fish to keep the lonely traveler company. My fish is boring but it’s nice to have a pet on loan. Highly recommended travel perk. The Monaco is hell-bent on details: a choice of turndown sweets, two bathrobes in the room, complimentary wine tasting in the lobby, even a handwriting analysis psychic and a massage therapist free of charge during the tasting. If it’s the little things that count, the Monaco’s number is very high.

Girder & Panel

Towers--click to enlargeIt struck me yesterday that my favorite building in New York has a lot in common with my favorite building in Hong Kong.

I don’t mention it much in this space, but I’m a huge architecture buff. The Bank of China Tower, at left in the image shown here, is one of my all-time favorite modern constructions, despite I.M. Pei’s apparent affront to feng shui. And for the past few months I’ve been extolling the bold virtues of the Hearst Tower to anyone who will listen.

A toast, then, to diagonal support beams.

Bank of China Tower

Hearst Tower

(The title of this post refers to the classic Girder and Panel toy of days past, which I may still have stashed away in my parents’ basement, and which is once again available. I wonder if I’m too old to get one.)

Mobilized troops, eh?

“The president has laid out a carrot-and-stick approach for controlling illegal immigration, and that includes using up to 6,000 National Guard troops to beef up border security.”

Not quite the same as this, is it:

“Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:

I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

Sage

Free wifi from next door: good

Free wifi that keeps cutting out on you unless you push the keyboard perilously close to the edge of the bed: bad

Paid wifi in the hotel with max signal: much better

Pillow talk

“Who sings ‘Rock You Like a Hurricane’?”

“The Scorpions.”

Pause.

“Does a hurricane really rock you?”

On the strike

I suppose I am compelled as a New York blogger to post about the transit strike that began this morning. In a nutshell: the action is ridiculous, because the transit union is legally forbidden to strike; that said, I’m with the TWU on this one, because the MTA is a textbook example of a poorly run government agency that doesn’t properly prioritize; yet within that, I had a nice commute this morning, in a car without traffic.

Frankly, the squabblers should just end the whole damned argument already. Labor disputes this nasty ultimately hurt both sides.

Pot!

I enjoy the casual card game, and from time to time I play poker and its many variants with friends. One of the more popular but frustrating games to play is Acey-Deucey.

The rules to Acey-Deucey, or In-Between, are fairly simple: dealer turns up two cards in succession. Player must make a bet in accordance to the expectation that a third card will fall within them. Win, and take the bet from the pot; lose, and pay it in. If the third card matches one of the first two, the loss is doubled. The game ends when someone gets a big spread, yells “Pot!” and wins the hand.

Acey-Deucey is popular because of the suspense and general table-wide humiliation that it causes. All too often someone calls “Pot!” on a decent hand and loses. This leads to a nice round of razzing and a larger pool of money for everyone else to conceivably mine.

The problem with this game, from a player’s standpoint, is that one’s chances of winning are pretty terrible. (You know the chances are against you if a casino is willing to play you and give you odds.) Let’s take a closer look.

There are 13 cards in a deck of cards, 14 if you count the ace as both low and high, since the ace can sometimes be low in this game. The only opportunities to win in Acey-Deucey are the thin windows in between the two drawn cards. At absolute best—ace low, ace high—the player has a 12 in 13 chance of winning on the next card. Usually, however, the cards are closer together, and that’s when problems set in.

Take, for example, Jack-3. Looks like a nice wide spread, doesn’t it? Tempts a lot of people to say “pot” when the pot isn’t too large, too. Except J-3 only has a 7 in 13 chance of winning: just 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 are winning draws. Suddenly what looks like a pretty solid hand only has 54% odds on it.

Moderate hands are actually the most dangerous. Nine-2? Sure, why not? But the odds drop to 46% on 9-2, enough to make Foxwoods some money and cost the player some coin. I’m not running full data at the moment, but a good number of hands are tight spreads like 3-5 or 7-8 that have nearly nonexistent chances of winning. All these hands do is up the size of the pot for a daring soul in a lucky moment.

Of course, some hands are solid; King-2 runs 10/13, or 77%, to win. But put fifty dollars jellybeans in the middle of the table and six friends saying “POT!” and suddenly you’ve got a nice maelstrom of aggravation on your hands. Which, of course, is why it’s fun, but also why I can’t stand the game.

Me, I like Screw Your Neighbor.

Just don’t bring her back to the store

Wal-Mart is getting attention for carrying high-end jewelry online this holiday season. A quick scan of walmart.com shows mid-grade diamond rings for around $5,000. Example: this 1.0 carat, G-H clarity, SI2 quality diamond in a simple solitaire setting for $5130.

Out of curiosity, I went to bluenile.com to compare prices, unsure whether Wal-Mart was willing and able to keep its trademark low margins on high-end merchandise. And it’s close. I pieced together this G-clarity, SI2, 1.01 carat diamond in a similar setting. Total price: $4605. Spending $5130 could have upgraded me to 1.08 or 1.09 carats with H clarity. I also could have spent a lot more money on the same size stone with better balance or other features. (SI2 isn’t all that special in the diamond world.)

In all, though, it’s not such a bad buy. Wal-Mart appears to be pricing some fluctuation into its list price, but its quality and cost are certainly fair. Zales charges $6999 for virtually the basic ring.

I am neither a jewelry nor a diamond expert, so this is just a casual observation from someone who knows a thing or two about buying diamonds. I’d personally go somewhere other than Wal-Mart (and Zales, for that matter) to buy my engagement ring. But for the casual shopper, it looks to be as honest as any storefront jeweler.

Not so Smart

I had the occasion in Italy to drive a Smart roadster coupe for a day. I was excited for the opportunity: As a former owner of a Nissan Sentra SE-R, I appreciate good small cars, and I have admired Smarts from afar for years. The thought of renting one (at less than two-thirds the cost of a, well, normal-size car) appealed to me, and after a little cajoling, my wife agreed, and off we went.

Smart is an impressive company in its conception—luxury automaker Mercedes creates a right-sized car for moped-friendly European cities—and its general appeal. Smarts are cute. They fit anywhere (a Fortwo can be parked head-in alongside parallel-parked cars). And, one would hope, the German engineering brought by DaimlerChrysler would make for a sturdy automobile.

Except the car is—how to put this?—a piece of junk.

As a basic disclaimer, let me state again that we rented the roadster, which is Smart’s version of a Testarossa: “a light, puristic car which makes every moment behind the wheel an experience in itself,” according to the Smart website. It had manual steering, a clutchless manumatic, a quick-firing engine and surprisingly fat rear tires.

But that selling statement was all too accurate. The six-speed manual, while fun on the Autostrade, was otherwise difficult to manage. Every gear shift, whether manual or automatic, was accompanied by an odd fluttering noise from either the rear tires or the gears themselves (we never pinpointed the sound). The brake pedal was surprisingly soft, a marked contrast to the peppy gas pedal and rear-mounted engine. The car had a hard time adjusting to Italy’s winding country roads; in automatic mode, the engine often revved to unreasonable levels when encountering small hills. Coupled with the soft brakes, a few hours on the back roads left me with a very sore knee.

This might be acceptable if the car were well made, but it’s not. Our 1000-kilometer-old roadster had wind noise and rattles from all directions. Doors and trunk slammed shut with the clang of metal against metal, not the comfortable thunk found in most new cars. Climbing into and out of the car was just that: climbing. At least the ergonomics in the cabin were good; controls were easy to reach, the seats were comfortable, and open windows provided great air without buffeting, although the low, curving roof limited visibility.

I had fun driving the Smart roadster coupe toward the end of the day, when we hit straight, open lanes and the car could act like itself. The engine was fun to push on gently curving one-lane roads, and on the highway, hitting 130 kph (80 mph) was a breeze—a breeze we heard, thanks to the poor wind deadening noted above. But the rest of the day was tough to handle (pun intended), and at one point the engine’s poor shifting made Amy nauseous.

I came away from the Smart generally disappointed. Its size and nimbleness are fun and particularly useful in Europe; I squeezed into one or two very small parking spaces. We probably would have been more satisfied with the Fortwo, which is a more civilized car that would have been easier to maneuver. But the build quality and poor engine responsiveness turned me off, and I no longer await the Smart’s uncertain entry to the U.S. market.

Mini, I’m all yours. Let’s go for a spin.

Katrina

A quick sidenote: I have been utterly fascinated (and a lot of other less pleasant verbs) by the goings-on surrounding Hurricane Katrina’s aftermath. I haven’t written much about it at length, but I’ve been logging lots of interesting news and perspective pieces, with snippets of my own commentary, in my del.icio.us news tag.

Here’s to a speedy recovery for all those affected by the storm, and to a winning season for the New Orleans Saints, because to many, sports still equals hope.

« Older posts Newer posts »

Ideapad © 1998–2025 David Wertheimer. All rights reserved.