My name is Suzanne Beezer. I work for NERB Delegation as a supply chain administrator. My job is to make sure that we deploy new technology in a responsible manner without putting affected communities at more risk. I'm a fundraiser. I bring stories of people caught up in conflict to philanthropists, corporates and foundations. I work with the ICIC as a staff health officer. All of us have come to a similar moment of wanting to do something useful and meaningful in our lives. What motivates me is the fact that I can impact people's lives, make them better, irrespective of the circumstances that they are in. When you see those videos of people receiving relief items that you have been part of in a small way to help get to the ground and places where people have been, you know, affected by conflict or are suffering drought, it makes it all worth it. Because when you work at the ICIC, you can really put the people back at the centre and understand how, you know, with your technical skills, you can make a difference here to influence those actors. When I joined the ICIC, I was looking for a place that was working toward common goods and improving people's lives. And then I came across this organization which worked for over 150 years, going through all the history of humanity without compromising on its values and mandates and that truly attracted me very much. ICIC is very invested in its people and the way they treat us in terms of training and opportunities presented to us. ICIC offers a competitive salary, pension benefits. There is our common humanity that really unites us and it's really given me more of a motivation to see what is my place in all this. How do I contribute to this? This organization is a global organization. We work everywhere but I think it's also important that our staff also come from everywhere and that translates into different ways of looking at the world and doing our work. This is a place with strong commitment. It's for individuals who have a strong moral compass, who want to do something significant and meaningful in their lives. My main motivation and the reason why I come to work is basically to make sure that people have a decent way of living, to ensure that people afflicted by war and atrocities have a better view of life. This is an organization with idealists, of people with strong technical skills and of people who want to make a difference. So if you are that person, you should think about joining us.


Our world is interconnected and COVID-19 has brought that home. Together, we're going through the most serious and widespread health crisis in living memory. The COVID-19 pandemic is a test to us all and to our societies and systems. To come out of it stronger, we need to stay home, to take protective measures, to show solidarity. To be most effective, measures to stop the spread of the virus need to include action to protect those most vulnerable. This pandemic is also a test to our principles and shared humanity. We see a wave of stigma and discrimination, which fits on misinformation and fear. Unlike COVID-19, racism and xenophobia are also contagious killers. All of us, especially political leaders and other influential figures, must speak out forcibly against the stigma and racism generated by this crisis. It is precisely in times of crisis that core human rights values can help us steer the best course. We need to come together and continue working for the common good with conviction and determination.


Well, anyway, let's get our Bibles out this morning. It's so good to be with you. I'm sorry that my wife couldn't make it. We had a big women's event at our church this past week and Then she signed up for grandma duty this weekend Our four kids have sired 11 grandkids And here here's the kicker. They're all 11 years old and under So it's quite a quite an event at our house around Thanksgiving. It's quite fun Anyway, let's get our Bibles out and let's turn to Genesis chapter 29 this morning I'd like to explore with you a story an interesting story We find it here in Genesis chapter 29 And we'll start by reading verses 1 through 20 Genesis 29 beginning in verse 1 So Jacob went on his journey and came to the land of the people of the east and He looked and saw a well in the field and Behold there were three flocks of sheep lying by it for out of that well.  And they said we are from Haran Then he said to them, do you know Laban the son of Nahor and they said, oh, we know him And so he said to them is he well and they said he is well and look his daughter Rachel is coming with the sheep Then he looked then he said look it is still high day It is not time for the cattle to be gathered together water the sheep and go and feed them But they said we cannot until all the flocks are gathered together and they have rolled the stone from the well's mouth Then we water the sheep Now while he was speaking with them Rachel came with her father's sheep For she was a shepherdess And it came to pass when Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother's brother and the sheep of Laban His mother's brother that Jacob went near and rolled the stone from the well's mouth and watered the flock of Laban his mother's brother Then Jacob kissed Rachel Lifted up his voice and web And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's relative and that he was Rebecca's son And so she ran and told her father Then it came to pass when Laban heard the report about Jacob his sister's son That he ran to meet him and embraced him and kissed him and brought him to his house And so he told Laban all these things and Laban said to him surely you are my bone in my flesh And he stayed with him for a month Then Laban said to Jacob Because you are my relative should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me what should your wages be? Now Laban had two daughters the name of the elder was Leah and the name of the younger was Rachel Leah's eyes were delicate, but Rachel was beautiful of form and appearance Now Jacob loved Rachel and so he said I will serve you seven years for Rachel your younger daughter And Laban said it is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to another man stay with me So Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed only a few days to him Because of the love he had for her Father in heaven. Thank you for your word and thank you for these couples Lord that have gathered this morning and Lord I recognize I know you recognize that they have set aside duties and tasks and responsibilities and sacrifice days off Have taken the time to come together to work on their marriage Lord, I know you're gonna bless that kind of effort Lord, I know you're gonna speak to us today. You're gonna encourage the marriages in this room Lord, I pray you would ring down your blessing upon them Lord fill them with your spirit fill them with love for each other and give them some insights and some tools that they can apply to their Relationship here today. We love you and ask these things in Jesus name Well, look welcome to a love story But a love story with a twist a boy named Jacob leaves home to start a life and to find a wife His journey leaves him to a Middle Eastern watering hole in Heron where he meets this gorgeous young Shepherdess named Rachel verse 17 here in Genesis 29 refers to Rachel as beautiful of form and appearance In other words both her face and her figure were attractive. She was a cover girl working as a shepherd She was stunningly beautiful. You could call her a fox in sheep's clothing The stone that covered the opening of the well was huge and heavy The shepherds usually waited on each other's arrival to water their flock since it required a combined effort to move the stone But on this day Rachel arrived in verse 10 tells us that Jake flexed his pecs and he moved the stone all by himself Nothing like a macho demonstration of a little muscle and trying to impress a girl But apparently it worked for we're told in verse 11 then Jacob kissed Rachel You know, I've heard it said a boy becomes a man when he discovers it's more fun to steal a kiss in second base Well, apparently a young Jacob is growing up He plants a kiss on ravishing Rachel and we're told in verse 11 Jacob lifted up his voice and I read recently of a woman over in Alabama Who's pet iguana stopped breathing? That's right. Petty guana She had to give the slimy reptile mouth-to-mouth resuscitation Afterwards she cried because she realized she had kissed the iguana Trust me that is not why Jacob is crying here His tears are tears of joy. He thinks that he has found the gall of his dreams But beginning in verse 16 the plot thickens Rachel takes her new boyfriend home to meet dad and Jacob should have been warned a Young man fresh from mama's house was no match for a shrewd dude like Laban Listen to what we're told in verse 16 Now Laban had two daughters The name of the elder was Leah and the name of the younger was Rachel Here is the twist in our love story For in Heron as in parts of the Middle East to this very day It was contrary to custom for the younger daughter to marry before her elder sister Thus Leah was a roadblock in Jacob's plans to marry Rachel and To make matters worse the prospects of Leah marrying anytime soon seemed slim For she had an awful problem We're told in verse 17 Leah's eyes were delicate, but Rachel was beautiful of form and appearance Now this phrase Leah's eyes were delicate. It can mean one of two things First it can refer to the health of Leah's eyes They were weak and squinted and perhaps even cross-eyed Rachel had these deep beautiful pools of blue these mesmerizing eyes Whereas her sister Leah had these little slits above her cheeks. I mean awful looking eyes But this phrase Leah's eyes were delicate can also be interpreted Leah was a cause for sore eyes That the pergur was so ugly. She made your eyes hurt when you looked at her Either way Rachel's sister Leah was not a very physically attractive young lady Which reminds me there's actually a woman's college in England in the town of ugly England and Recently a spokeswoman for the Institute was quoted as saying we try to call ourselves the women's Institute of Ugly But the name never sticks and I'm sure the women in the school are no doubt glad But oh Leah She could have graduated magna cum laude from the women's Institute of Ugly Rachel was a sight for sore eyes Whereas Leah made your eyes sore Well when Laban offered Jacob a job and told him to set his own wages Jacob makes an interesting request verse 18 reads Now Jacob loved Rachel So he said I will serve you seven years for Rachel your younger daughter the length of time No doubt show the depth of Jacob's love for Rachel and probably how long he thought it would take for Leah to marry first verse 19 and Laban said it is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to another man stay with me So Jacob serves seven years for Rachel and they seemed only a few days to him Because of the love he had for her how beautiful is that? His love for Rachel made the time fly by and I believe the willingness to wait is always a characteristic of true love Well verse 21 moves ahead seven years Then Jacob said to Laban Give me my wife for my days are fulfilled that I may go into her And Laban gathered together all the men of the place and made a feast Now an Oriental marriage feast lasted a whole week So for seven days the groom and his buddies partied hearty I mean that means by the time the wedding night rolled around Jacob was probably sauced maybe tanked verse 23 informs us Now it came to pass in the evening that he being Laban Took Leah his daughter and brought her to Jacob and Jacob went into her In addition to Jacob being inebriated the brides in those days were heavy veils and flowing robes And since there were no electric lights in the honeymoon cottage Jacob assumes that he was going to bed and consummating his marriage with his beloved Rachel Verse 25 fast-forward about eight hours So it came to pass in the morning that behold It was Leah And it is hard to read that line with the same sense of disappointment Jacob must have felt He had been stabbed in the back For seven years. He had worked hard to hold Rachel in his arms Only now to be double-crossed What a betrayal and He said to Laban. What is this you've done to me? Was it not for Rachel that I served you? Why then have you deceived me? Well again Jacob kisses a girl and starts to weep But this time for a much different reason He has kissed the iguana. He has spent the night with old lizard eyes Leah Now in verse 26 Laban stuns Jacob with the answer It must not be done. So in our country to give the younger before the firstborn And what an ironic twist of fate For if you know your Old Testament, you'll recall that before leaving home Jacob had stolen the rights of the firstborn from his older brother Esau Jacob had spit in the eye of custom and now custom was spitting back Jacob the deceiver gets deceived what goes around comes around. This is why honesty is always the best policy Now this Laban, he's a sly guy. He's a crafty bargainer himself. And so he makes Jacob an offer of his own He says fulfill her week and we will give you this one that is Rachel also for the service Which you will serve with me still another seven years Laban will give Rachel to Jacob now in return for another seven years of service And Jacob agrees verse 30 tells us Then Jacob also went into Rachel and he loved Rachel more than Leah and he served with Laban still another seven years Never doubt Jacob's initial love for Rachel He serves a total of 14 years for Rachel But the question arises What should Jacob have actually done after he woke up next to Leah? And it is my opinion that Jacob should have never married Rachel Nowhere in the Bible does God approve a bigamy a Man was never meant to have multiple wives In Matthew 19 verses 4 through 6 our Lord Jesus himself lays out God's ideal for marriage Have you not read that he who made them at the beginning made them male and female and Said for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh So then they are no longer two But one flesh God's blueprint for marriage was for one man and one woman to remain in a lifetime relationship God tolerated bigamy as he tolerates divorce today, but realized he never gave it his stamp of approval In fact, even even Jesus himself condemned bigamy you remember the verse Matthew 6 verse 24 tells us No man can serve two masters Obviously God never intended for a man to be married to two women. In fact recently Middle East Archaeologists have unearthed the cuneiform tablet The translators worked real hard to try to decipher the meaning of the tablet In matter of fact, it's entitled the top 10 reasons no man in his right mind would want two wives And I actually have with me here the translation from the ancient Caldean Semitic right here right here on this piece of paper Here it is right now number 10 Twice as many birthdays and anniversaries to remember Number nine you have to pick who gets the second garage door opener. I could be difficult Number eight by the time two wives take a shower. There's no more hot water Number seven who can afford two dozen roses on Valentine's Day, that'll set you back Number six when it's time to choose it's now two against one Number five, this is my favorite your one drawer and half a foot of closet space gets cut in half Number four two wives would be frowned on at the Calvary Chapel marriage conference Number three two honeydew lists Number two, this is where it gets a little dicey two mother-in-laws and The number one reason no man in his right mind wouldn't want two wives PMS twice a month. Well, apparently Jacob never read this top 10 list for if he had He would have added one more reason why two wives are not a good idea They might not get along Just read ahead here Jacob's family became a sordid example of infighting and envy and Ugliness and bitterness and hatred and deception and resentment and manipulation In fact later when Rachel names one of her made sons She calls him naftali or my wrestling and she says with great wrestling's I have wrestled with my sister See Jacob lived and his kids were raised in the middle of two warring women This was not a happy home The story reminds me of an Italian fellow Who was getting married the ceremony happened to be outdoors right next to the ocean And on the day of the wedding a heavy fog rolled in In fact the cloud was so thick that he couldn't see what he was doing and he accidentally married two women When asked to explain himself he said Well, it was a big amiss It was a big amiss And so was Jacob. He too was a big amiss. I believe Jacob should have never married Rachel He should have left with Leah and learned to be content But I can hear some of you saying come on Sandy the girl was ugly as mud and he didn't even love her How can you say he should have left with Leah? Well here you hear you I Believe that even if Jacob didn't love her if the two of them had conducted their marriage God's way Jacob would eventually love Leah every bit as much as he initially loved Rachel for love grows When marriage is done God's way sounds funny saying it but the feeling of love is A far overrated ingredient when it comes to success in marriage Oh, it's important in courtship, but in marriage it's way overblown Successful marriages are built on commitment and sacrifice not simply feelings I've seen marriages where the love was depleted But the husband and wife decided to stick it out and do things God's way and love started to grow again On the other hand, I've seen marriages abounding and loving feelings But the couple ignored God's wisdom and the feelings dwindled as the marriage broke apart See if you wanted to plant a garden and you had the best seed available Yet you buried that seed in sorry scourts superficial soil I don't care how good the seed might be it would fail to germinate in the sorry soil Yet if I had inferior seed But fertile and nutritious and moist dirt even the sick seed would grow in the healthy soil And so it is in marriage Give me two people that can't stand each other and encourage that couple to interact God's way and Love will grow out of nowhere. I have seen it happen In his letter to his daughter author Charlie shed he passes on some important advice He says marriage is not so much finding the right person as it is being the right person Let me repeat that it's worth the price of admission Marriage is not so much finding the right person as it is being the right person. Oh The dating game emphasizes finding the right person and relying on chemistry to cement the marriage What happens when the chemistry dries up? Well, we blame our former mister or missus right he or she must not have been the right one after all We remind ourselves. There are other fish in the sea. We throw back our current spouse and we rebate our hook Some of us keep kissing frogs thinking we'll finally find our prince or our princess It never dawns on some people that the problem just might be them I honestly believe you can take a man and a woman who've never seen each other But are determined to do marriage God's way The man willing to love his wife is Christ loves the church and the woman willing to follow her husband as the church is to follow Christ Each of them caring and serving and showing compassion and giving of their time ensuring their hearts and living their lives for each other You put those two people together and they'll end up happily married Actually, this is what happened to Jacob and Leah as We were told in verse 30 in the beginning Jacob loved Leah loved Rachel more than Leah But there is strong evidence that slowly over time Jacob's initial feelings changed in In fact we're told later in the chapter when the Lord saw that Leah was unloved. He opened her womb But Rachel was barren So Leah conceived and bore a son and she called his name Ruben Where she said the Lord has surely looked on my affliction now therefore my husband will love me And at first your heart just breaks for Leah doesn't she's always longing for Jacob's love Notice what happens next then she conceived again and bore a son and said because the Lord has heard that I am Unloved he has therefore given me this son also and she called his name Simeon She conceived again and bore a son and said now this time my husband will become attached to me Because I have borne him three sons Therefore his name was called Levi Obviously, oh Leah kept laboring to make her marriage better All that's mentioned here of her efforts are her three labors, but I'm sure she labored in many other ways as well Finally verse 35 tells us and she conceived again and bore a son and said Now I will praise the Lord therefore she called his name Judah, which means praise Then she stopped bearing The implication is that all her effort paid off with the birth of Judah. She now praises God Finally her desires have been fulfilled at last she experiences the enjoyment and the security of marital love and no longer Fills the need to bear another child Now when you jump ahead to the end of Jacob's life you find him making an interesting choice in Genesis 49 he is lying on his deathbed and With his last breath Jacob makes a dying request He cries out Bury me in the cave Where they buried Abraham in Sarah Isaac and Rebecca and where I buried Leah You would have thought Jacob would want his final resting place to be next to Rachel in Bethlehem But oh no, he has to be buried in Mamre alongside Leah You see on the first night of their marriage Jacob resented lying next to Leah But at the end of their road together it was his utmost desire Jacob wanted to make sure that until the day of the resurrection that his bones would lie next to Leah's Apparently his heart had turned It's ironic, but Rachel died prior to Leah. Thus Leah was the wife who ended up with Jacob all to herself It was Jake and Leah who enjoyed growing old together It's also interesting that it's through Leah not Rachel that Judah was born The Messiah came through the tribe of Judah. Thus Jesus was of the lineage of Leah not Rachel Perhaps that was God's way of putting his stamp of approval on the union between Jacob and Leah Their offspring was the linked in the royal line in the beginning we're told Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah But in the end the roles reversed Old lizard eyes Leah became Jacob's beloved on that awful morning When Jacob awoke to discover he was lying next to Leah That he had been double-crossed He didn't seek an annulment.   Its vows are binding in God's plan friend. Won't you say I do you did In his sovereignty God allowed the two of you to marry The Almighty could have stopped it The pastor could have come down with laryngitis A lightning bolt could have struck the church minutes before you walked down the aisle But God chose to let it happen The deed is now done. Now. It's up to you to accept your marriage as God's will and make the best of it You remember that old song from the 70s? I think it was written by steven stills If you can't be with the one you love honey Love the one you with Hey, that's biblical.  How can I possibly apply this sour situation to the marriages there at calvary chapel? Well, I believe the lord gave me a figurative application that speaks to us today I know it goes a bit beyond the context, but it's not unbiblical in what it teaches Here it is I believe that just like jacob every married person in this room today is in a sense married to two people That's right You're married to two people if you're a man You're married to both a leah and a rachel If you're a woman, you're married to both a lee and a ray Now hear me out.  Oh, no It's leah I have kissy iguana See you need to come to terms with the truth There is a leah and a rachel living side by side in every spouse It's been noted in rural japan A man's wife is chosen by his parents and he doesn't know her until after the wedding Though the custom in america is completely different the end result is the same And it's true I don't care how long you date a person before you marry Whether it's seven months or seven years or 17 years You never learn all there is to know about your spouse Believe me there will definitely be some surprises after the wedding day See there are aspects of your spouse that resemble leah And hey the blemishes were there from the beginning Oh, but you were drunk on love and you didn't see them See your spouse is not what you thought and it's a shock when you realize it And so the question becomes what do you do with a leah? Or with a lee Well the first morning after jacob saw her he complained to laban But what did he do the next morning or the next or the morning after he had left laban's house Well, here's what jacob does let me read you verse 31 again When the lord saw that leah was unloved He opened her womb But rachel was barren jacob began to see that the fruitfulness in his life Was coming from leah not rachel That the offspring the growth The real fruit was being supplied by leah Oh, yeah for a while there rachel was still his choice for a good time I mean at first. She was certainly the wife. He took to the company functions to make a good impression with the boss But over time jacob realized that god's blessing was more on leah than on the trophy wife God was using leah more than rachel to grow jacob and his family Surprisingly spiritual life and fruitfulness came more from old sore eyes than from the cover girl And here is the application to our lives to our marriages It's often the rough edges The ugly traits the ordinary attitudes in your spouse That cause you to grow and mature spiritually When i'm loving and sensitive and compassionate i console i encourage my wife i minister to her Oh, but when i test her patience And push her kindness And tax her endurance and stretch her faith i force her to trust in the lord and jesus ministers to her You can put it like this When sandi's on his best behavior he causes kathy to glow But when sandi is less than his best he causes kathy to grow Fruitfulness flowed into jacob's life through ugly leah rather than through gorgeous rachel And the fruit of god's spirit will flow into our lives when our spouse's Blimishes force us to draw upon the lord When my wife looks to me and i call sore eyes It forces her to look to jesus and she gets blessed Now don't misunderstand I'm not suggesting that there are no limits to our acceptance of a spouse's behavior For example, i don't believe that a married person should ever stand idly by and bear with a promiscuous or an abusive spouse These are not the traits that leah represents When a person tolerates a beating or a cheating it makes them an accomplice to the crime You become part of the problem rather than part of the solution Now here's my point this morning. I'm simply suggesting that you learn to accept your spouse's humanness Leah couldn't help the fact she was ugly And i'm sure she did the best with what she had She styled her hair and applied lots and lots of makeup Bought lots and lots of beautiful veils. I'm sure she tried And likewise all married folks should try to be the best that they can be But the real breakthrough in this relationship came when jacob learned to accept his wife unconditionally See we all should want to please our spouse and glorify god But we need to face the fact that no matter how hard we try None of us is ever going to be perfect Leah turned out to be a diamond in the rough But jacob didn't see or appreciate her beauty until he gave up trying to change her And accepted his situation It's a wise man a wise woman who stops trying to change their leah or their league I heard someone say the only time a woman succeeds in changing a man is when he's a baby or Women marry men expecting to change them while men marry women thinking they will never change Both get disappointed husband wife. It is not for you to change your spouse Your job is to love your spouse God will change your spouse if he or she needs to be changed I heard a wonderful story of a wife whose husband bought her brand new car She was maneuvering in the mall parking lot when she had an accident and it was her fault She worried about her husband's reaction When the police arrived they asked to see her proof of insurance and so she opened up the glove box And along with the insurance card she found a note When she read it it made her cry Well, the policeman asked her what was wrong All she could do she was crying the weeping she all she could do is just handing the note It was from her husband and it read Honey in case of an accident Remember it's you I love not the car Here's a husband who decided in advance to simply love his lia This is how you turn a lia into a lover You accept him or her for better or worse You love your spouse for who they are warts and all sore eyes or not Once a hillbilly wife commented on her wedding vows She told her friend she said them their vows say for better or worse Because he ain't gonna get no better and he sure can't get no worse So I take him as is Hey, lia was probably as ugly the day jake buried her as the day he married her But along the way jake have learned to accept her as is And this is what each of us needs to do for the lia in our spouse you see Conditional acceptance is the miracle cure It frees up the lia in a person from the pressure and the insecurity of never measuring up And trust me we are always better and more lovable when we know we can be ourselves and we'll still be accepted And it also frees up the jake up in us from allowing impossible Expectations to hang a constant cloud of disappointment and failure over our marriage You see the jake in all of us needs to stop mourning over what ain't and what can't and start enjoying again what is We get so fixated on the 10 negative in our spouse. We forget the 90 positive all that we still love about them We forget lia and rachel live side by side On her 50th wedding anniversary a wife shared the secret to her long happy marriage She said on my wedding day. I decided to make a list of 10 of my husband's faults Which for the sake of our marriage I would overlook Well aghast asked what 10 faults did you list? The lady shrugged. She said well to tell you the truth. I never got around to listing them But whenever my husband did something that made me hop and mad. I'd say to myself lucky for him. That's one of the 10 forgiveness mercy patience acceptance Tolerance gentleness compassion That's all stuff that we as christians are supposed to be good at isn't it? And you see these are also the ingredients that transform a lia into a lover See each one of us wants and expects our mate to accept the lia in us But this morning.  I mean my the old boy's come a long way. He's had a marriage conference today. Can you imagine? He carries a lot of responsibility He loves you and those kids and he wants to be a godly man Why don't you support him even when he doesn't do all that you'd like him to do? See each married person here has a choice We can focus on the thorns that are on our rows Or the rows That's among our thorns Our cup is either half empty or half full It's up to us If you want to have a fruitful marriage Then the two of you need to decide to simply Love your lia Father, we thank you for your word to us this morning Lord, I pray for all the couples here today. Please bless them lord Lord, please bless them abundantly. Please work in their hearts today Lord unconditional love is truly the miracle cure May we love each other as Jesus has loved us And in his name we pray


Welcome back to our lecture series Math 1220 Calculus II for students at Southern Utah University. As usual, I'm your professor today, Dr. Andrew Misseldine. I want to continue our discussion about parametric curves that we had started in lecture 29. These examples can be, for most part, are taken from James Stewart's Calculus Textbook section 10.1 here about parametric curves. What I want to do in this video is talk about a very important parametric curve referred to as the cycloid. In the previous video, we saw a lot of parameterizations that came from trigonometry. This one will not be excluded from that one. It's a little bit more complicated, mind you, but it's still a pretty important one to talk about here, the cycloid. Imagine you have a circle, like this yellow one we see right here. This circle, we want to consider the curve that's traced out by a point on the circle. It's on the circumference of the circle, so this point P right here. We want to think of the point that's traced out as the circle rolls along a straight line, which we'll say is the x-axis right here. Now to help give a better illustration of this, I'm actually going to use a graphic, a gif from that taken courtesy of Wikipedia. You can find the link in the description below. So we have a circle with a fixed point, and so we're imagining if that point could trace a curve in space here, then what would the shape of that thing look like? And so this is what we mean by this cycloid, right? It looks like a cartwheel, maybe the wheel of a hand cart being pulled by a Mormon pioneer or something like that. As this cartwheel spins, imagine we tie a handkerchief to the cartwheel, and you're the 12 year old child who's given the task of counting how many times this thing spins around. Well, as you're going to hike around 12 miles in a given day, that's going to be a lot of rotations, and so you might get bored. And so you start imagining the path in the air of the handkerchief that we tied to the cartwheels and spins and spins and spins and spins, like you see happening right here. So we want to find an equation to describe this curve, this red curve you see in front of us, or at least we want to find parametric equations that can describe it. And so to do that, let's start to parameterize our cartwheel here, which we see in yellow, right? So just as it rolls along the x-axis key track of our point P, for convenience, we'll assume that P actually did pass through the origin where x and y-axis cross each other. Okay, so let's see. Suppose that the circle rolled some distance from the origin to some point P, right? And its coordinates will be given as x and y. Suppose x is measuring how far from the origin you are horizontally, and y measures how far above the x-axis you are vertically, alright? And we're going to let T be the point right here that is directly below the center of the circle at this given moment of time. So if we just take like a snapshot of our cartwheel and we look at where the handkerchief is on the wheel, we have this, we have the center of the circle, that will be where the axle is for the wheel. If we just look at the point directly above the ground, that will be my T, right there. So it's the intersection between the circle and the x-axis. And let Q be the intersection between the line TC and the horizontal line containing P. So if we take the line that's determined by the point C and T, that's Charlie and Tango there, and if we take the horizontal line that passes through the point P, we're going to call that point of intersection Q for Quebec there, alright? The radius of our circle, we're going to say is R, and the line PC, Papa Charlie there, with QT, so Quebec Tango there, it forms an angle. We're going to call that angle theta, and we're going to measure the angle PCT in radians for this discussion. And that way we can connect angles with arc length, which is going to be useful in this. So that's a description of all of the variables that are in play, the points and things like this. Again, this is just for one snapshot in time. So consider the line segment PC and CT. These are a radii of the circle, so their distances are both going to be R. So let's make a comment about that. So we know that the length of PC and the length of CT, these are both R because they're radii of the circle. Also, since the circle rolled along the x-axis, we know that the distance between O and T, so this distance right here, the distance from O to T, write that down, O to T, this is going to be the arc, the arc length of PT. That is, if we take the arc length from P to T right here, that's the same distance here because as it rolled from P to T, these parts were on the ground at some point. So we want to calculate this arc length there. Now this arc, the arc PT is associated to the angle PCT, right? And so by the usual arc length formula, this is going to equal R theta, as you see indicated in our diagram right there. Now let's do a little bit of trigonometry here. Consider the triangle PQC, right there it is, a right triangle with angle theta inside of it. Notice that this is, with respect to theta, this is the opposite side of the triangle, this is the hypotenuse, and therefore by a simple trigonometric argument, just so Catoa-type stuff, PQ will have length equal to R sine of theta. That's because PQ over PC is equal to sine and PC is equal to R, clear the denominators there. Likewise, this side, QC is the adjacent side of the triangle. So using the cosine relationship, we are going to get that QC, the length of the segment QC is equal to R cosine theta. All right, so we're gathering some good information right here. So now what we want to do is we want to describe the dimensions X and Y. So what we're trying to do, the location, we want to describe the location of these numbers X and Y. So if we start with X, X, it's actually just the distance along the line right here. Well, if we take the whole distance OT, right, we take the whole distance OT and we subtract from that the distance PQ. That's just going to be our X here, right? Because OT is this distance right here. If we subtract this distance right here, that just leaves us with X. That's nice and dandy. And since we have OT, OT is going to be R theta. And we also have PQ, that is R sine theta. We can describe the, we can describe the X with respect to this parameter theta right here. Now I noticed that there's a common factor of R right here. So if we factor that out, we're going to get X equals R times theta minus sine theta, like so. So we can describe parametrically X with respect to theta here. All right, what about Y? Y is going to be this distance right here. And so by a similar strategy, we're going to take the whole distance CT and we're going to subtract from it QC. So Y will equal CT minus QC, like so. And like we observed earlier, CT is a radius, so its length is R. And QC, as we can still see on the screen, is R cosine theta.  And so this right here, these boxed equations, give us a parameterization of this cycloid, where we can describe the cycloid in terms of this parameter theta. And so as this, as your parameter, as your theta goes from 0 to 2 pi, that would give one complete rotation of the cartwheel, and therefore that forms one arch, that gives us one arch of our cycloid. As you go from, this is going to go from theta from 0 to 2 pi, right? Now in terms of distance, the horizontal distance along here would be up to 2 pi R, of course, because that's the radius of the circle. But one arch is parameterized from 0 to 2 pi. If we want to do the next arch, we'll go from 2 pi to 4 pi. If we want to do the next arch, we'll go from 4 pi to 6 pi. If we want to go back in time here, we could do this arch right here. This would be going from negative 2 pi to 0, things like that. So every multiple 2 pi would give us another arch of the cycloid. And so we have a very nice parameterization for our cycloid here. This is going to be a good friend that we're going to come back to several times in the next section.


I can't believe you put this in the video. Bro, you're so, you're super solid for that, bro. That was, you made my, you made my day. What's good, y'all? It's your boy Ross, back out again with another video. So we got an interesting one. Raines versus Lesnar, the never ending saga. You guys have been asking me to check this out by none other than Super Kick Studios. So that's what I'm doing right now. Some of you guys sent it to me on Instagram and Twitter and some of you guys commented on a few of my videos saying I need to check this out. So that's what I'm here for. We all know Roman and Lesnar, a lot of us are kind of tired of their one on one bout or the matches, you know, they've had with other people in it. It's like we are, we're kind of over it. We were hoping WrestleMania was gonna be the last time but injuries had hit WWE and changed up their plans. So now they went back with the tried and true formula of having Brock Lesnar and Roman Reigns main event ahead of a major pay-per-view. Will this match be good? Their last man standing match at Summer Slam? Hopefully it is. I've said in the previous video, there needs to be blood. There needs to be flaming tables. There needs to be attempted murders if we're having a last man standing match. And is their last match ever going against each other? I need to see some attempted murders. Simple as that. I'm being so dead serious. If someone's not trying to set someone ablaze or literally try to win their life, I don't wanna see it. Simple as that. And let's just try to go all out since it's your last time going at each other and go from there. So we'll see what he has to say. Should be interesting. Let's get right into this video. Appreciate all the love and support. Let's do this thing. Not the fight forever, Chance. This is not that situation. Yeah, these two have taken that chant a little bit too literal. And for the better part of the past eight years, Brock Lesnar and Roman Reigns have been joined at the hip. This year at Summer Slam, they're set to have their seventh one-on-one match on pay-per-view. And it's got a lot of fans really tired. There are some, including myself, who are actually excited to see what these two can do in a last man standing match. I think it has potential to be a perfect car crash. But there are people out there who are just really sick and tired of this repeat cycle. While you might ask, well, they're tired of seeing this match main event what seems like every pay-per-view. They've seen it three times at WrestleMania and each time with a progressively worse match in retrospect. The problem that many fans have is not necessarily with Roman Reigns or Brock Lesnar as people. The problem is they're not enjoying this copy-paste booking. It seems like for every big pay-per-view where there's a clear other option, WWE runs back to the well with this story. This is very true. The reality some people forget is that this match draws money. No matter how many times it happens at the end of the day for WWE, that's the goal to make money, to put butts in the seats at SummerSlam, sell merch and all the rest. And let me remind you that there was a time where we had two other guys, Cena Orton. These guys wrestled for what felt. And this is very true. They did the same thing. They did the same thing. They're doing the same thing here with Roman and Brock. Like forever. And now there's people out there clamoring for just one more match. So hey, man, one thing I've learned in wrestling is to just enjoy things while you have them. Nothing lasts forever, unless you're Ric Flair. But before we analyze the good and the bad in this rivalry up until this point, it's important to see how we got here and the arduous path between these two. Let's go all the way back. Cash your mind back to 2015. The Royal Rumble of that year is where WWE strapped a rocket to Roman Reigns and they wanted to build the next generation of the company with him at the forefront. Coming out of the shield, he was naturally cool, but they gave him a character of basically looking like Super Cena number two. And as you'll see later on, characters can really make or break stories. He won the Royal Rumble and even got big time endorsement from The Rock, but it wasn't enough. Fans hijacked that night and you might ask why. Well, it was too much too soon. They didn't like the direction of the character and he himself didn't exude qualities of a guy who was ready at this point. He was at the look, but he just didn't seem ready. Add to that that Daniel Bryan, who a lot of fans wanted in the main event was cast aside a year after he won the big one at Mania. But nonetheless, Reigns was gonna face Brock at WrestleMania 31 in the main event. Brock had captured the WWE title off John Cena at SummerSlam 2014 after his historic win against The Undertaker. The basis for this story was the young gun versus the veteran. And what didn't help their cause heading into WrestleMania is that on the go home, they had a tug of war for the WWE title. Regardless, it was a fresh new matchup that we hadn't seen before. Going in, there was next to no expectation for this. It was basically like, all right, give Roman the title and move on. But they- Yeah, a lot of people, even me, I thought, well, they're clearly giving the title to Roman Reigns. You know what I'm saying? We know this is about to happen. They're about to boo him out of the building. This is what's gonna happen. But boy, were we wrong. And surprisingly, that was one of the best switch rooms they have ever done. Oh, it was so good. They exceeded all expectations and they turned what many believed would be a dud into an all-time main event. The match was a knockout-dragout fight. It was a great match. It was going around Roman, Roman countering with his explosiveness and power. But that main event is mostly remembered for what Michael Cole coined the heist of the century.  This finish was pretty crazy considering that it looked like Roman was gonna get the win. His dad, Sika, even wanted him to quit the WWE because of this finish. Reigns had about 30 family members in attendance that night, and the plan was for him to win the WWE title, get his crowning moment. But midway through the show, those plans changed, and it resulted in his dad reportedly being ready to start a war. Damn, I didn't know none of that. I knew they changed it because I knew originally it was gonna be Roman getting his moment. But they changed it. During the show, this was one of those hot shot bookings that actually worked. It worked. Oh my God, it worked. And a war is what this match was. The higher-ups were probably as stunned as we were as to just how well these two meshed together. And for Vince McMahon, he'd found a formula that would lead him into the next generation, Roman and Brock. But here began a problem that we've seen before, the recycle cycle, where you find a formula that works and to avoid building up a new and refreshing story, you go back to the well and you continue a few that exhausted all aspects of it already. In turn, not only annoying the fan base, but having a ripple down effect on the rest of the roster. And as you'll see later on in this video, it's not a good effect. A cycle that we've seen with the likes of Randy Orton and John Cena, Triple H and Shawn Michaels. More recently, Sasha Banks and Charlotte. And for WWE, they just haven't been able to get out of this holding pattern. This was the catalyst for what we have to date. And as much as this rivalry is ragged on, there's been points of this story that have been absolutely fantastic. Anyways, through 2015, the company cooled it with Roman Reigns and come early 2016, Roman's push was in full swing again. The next time Brock and Roman would meet would be in the main event of Fastlane 2016, this time with Dean Ambrose in the mix as well. This was the number one contenders match to see who'd face Triple H for the WWE title. This one was won by Roman, but he pinned Dean to do so. So Roman was going to WrestleMania 32. He ended up winning that match. Lesnar remained busy with the likes of- And that wasn't a bad match. I enjoyed that match for what it was. It was actually kind of enjoyable. Well, not even kind of, it was pretty enjoyable. It's just, you knew what they were doing. I honestly really wish they would have gave Dean Ambrose to rub here at the time, but that'll come in later point, but you knew what they were doing. Dean Ambrose, Randy Orton and Goldberg through 2016 and early 2017. It was at WrestleMania 33 where Brock beat Goldberg for the Universal title. It was that same Universal title where these two would meet again. This time in a multi-man match featuring Samoa Joe and Braun Strowman. The story this time was simple. All four men were going after each other. They couldn't determine a number one cont- This, the build up to this was great. The match itself was great. This was a Summer Slam match. I love this match. I loved it.  It was just a car crash. This was fun. Still think Brock should have shopped the title then to at least Samoa Joe or Braun Strowman.  And senders sold this was thrown together. This was fun. This match was a beautiful car crash. This was so fun. I love this match, near falls, carnage, a huge emphasis on power throughout the match, each man having their time to shine. And again, it was Brock who came out on top, pinning Roman Reigns' shoulders to the mat. Here, Brock would basically go into retreat with Ross' top prize. Brock was filling his obligations as a part-time performer. He only had to show up a select number of dates so the company leaned into the story for the next year's WrestleMania. Merginary versus hero. Roman won the elimination chamber, giving him a universal title match at WrestleMania 34. The second these two would meet in a WrestleMania main event, the story was simple. Brock never showed up and Roman was gonna fight to bring the title back to rock. The company continued to position Roman Reigns as a conquering. It still didn't work. I just want you guys to understand, no matter what they did, it did not work for Roman. It just, we saw through it. We saw, we weren't seeing the true guy. We were seeing what WWE wanted us to see and we could see right through that bull crap. No, Roman, we didn't want you as the squeaky, clean baby face.  That's the Roman we got now. That's what we wanted. Hero where the clear direction was for him to play the bad guy. Upon a rewatch, you can see that in 2018 he's improved a ton on the mic, but his one fatal flaw was the audience's reception towards him. There were still fans who just didn't buy him as a good guy yet. This was something that added fuel to the ongoing dislike for this rivalry. It was basically like, all right, you're giving us a copy paste of a match that we saw two years ago. Meanwhile, this guy is basically being shoved down our throats and don't get that twisted. Some people, they loved Roman. Oh yeah. For a majority, it seemed like a split. The push for him to play a bad guy was really heavy. And I tell you this because it becomes important as the story wears into the present day. So they have Roman handcuffed. What's up, Ricky Starks? The fact that the entire roster wants Brock dethroned as champion and they respect Roman. Roman gets suspended for calling Lesnar Vince's boy and they tried to build sympathy for Reigns by having him as a guy who, even while he was suspended, he would just show up like a badass. It kinda worked, kinda didn't. I guess it depends on how you see it. Going into WrestleMania fans expected Roman to stand tall for a third straight mania having beat Triple H and Undertaker at the past two. But to our surprise, the winner was Brock Lesnar. Music came out that Lesnar was looking for a UFC return and his contract was gonna expire, but he instead re-signed. This match seemed pretty awkward at points.  It just seemed like people didn't really care. Brock won with the sixth F5, leaving Reigns bloodied and raw without a full-time champion. Just 19 days later, a rematch would happen at the greatest Royal Rumble, this time inside a steel cage. And the idea heading in was that if WWE were to have Roman win the title, it would be a bit calmer, I guess you could say, because the Saudi crowd would be more receptive to a Reigns title win. While in North America, he'd probably get booed out of the building. The match clocked in at nine minutes and 15 seconds and came to an end when Reigns speared Brock through a panel of the steel cage. Reigns' feet clearly touched first, but Lesnar was awarded the win. Yeah, they definitely botched that. Clearly his feet hit first, but they, ooh, no, it didn't happen. Now there was even more confusion, frustration, and a lack of apathy for a lot of wrestling fans. A lot of them were just sick and tired of this repeat cycle. These two would meet for a third and final time in 2018, this time at Summerslam. They continued this thread of painting Brock as the guy who used his contract to never show up, having raw revolve around Brock and Roman. That's crazy, another Summerslam with these motherfuckers main event. That's crazy. Reigns continued to call out Brock, but to no avail. They also teased Paul Heyman and Roman Reigns aligning together after Brock and Paul had an on-screen falling out. The foreshadowing is honestly so crazy, but of course, it was all a ruse. Paul blinding Roman to make the crowd sympathetic towards Roman. We get to Brooklyn for Summerslam and right as the bell is about to ring, Braun Strowman comes out and he says he's gonna cash in the money in the bank on the winner. The company used the prospect of a money in the bank cash in to keep the crowd engaged in the match and make sure that they wouldn't just boo both guys into oblivion because they themselves knew that this would get a negative response from the crowd. You go when you watch this, Strowman's reaction is thunderous. I'm pretty sure nobody wanted either of these guys. When he came out there, they all, Strowman was so over by default. They wanted him to win. Please put the title on him. He had the money in the bank and should have pulled an audible. But you know how that goes. As to be champion, this match, it was a fast paced one. Reigns coming out with three Superman punches and two spears before Brock caught the third into a guillotine.  That they were just a little annoyed at seeing this for a third straight time. Roman and Brock, each take out Strowman. Brock then flings the contract to the top of the ramp. This was to get Strowman out of the match and quickly WWN in this match right away. Roman hits a spear, one, two, three. The company cuts out quickly. No cash in, but Reigns has finally done it. Unfortunately, Roman Reigns announced that he had to leave WWE for a while as his leukemia returned. These two wouldn't meet again for three years. Now it's important to remember the dynamic between these two. Roman was always presented as the conquering hero for the people while Brock was just there to cash a check and be a mercenary. But in 2020, that dynamic changed and this story, in my opinion, became the most interesting that it had ever been. It definitely got better when the roles changed. That's when it got the most interesting. Now it's not as interesting only because it's like this should have been done. But when Roman became heel and Brock became more of a cowboy face, like he actually seemed like he was having fun, that's when everything changed dynamic-wise for the few, did we? The pandemic rolls around. Brock was basically nowhere to be seen after WrestleMania 36. WWE was producing shows out of the Thunderdome and at the end of SummerSlam, Roman returned from a brief hiatus to be with this family. And the prayers of many had finally been finished. Roman Reigns was now a heel. The tribal chief was born and he really went all in with this. Strong character work, different presentation, strong storytelling. From the mannerisms to everything in between, he became what many had been clamoring for him to be calling for years. But arguably the biggest game changer in this entire thing was Paul Heyman, now in Roman Reigns' corner. The same Heyman who, with the exception of a few years, had managed Brock Lesnar's entire career since 2002. Reigns became Universal Champion, he had defenses against guys like Edge, Daniel Bryan, Jey Uso, Kevin Owens, and then came the biggest one of them all. John Cena at SummerSlam 2021, where with one spear, he beat the former face of the company. He had built this amazing star aura to him, just as he celebrates and SummerSlam is coming to an end, Brock Lesnar came calling. After over a year away, he was back with a new grizzled look, now sporting a ponytail and a different attire, but the biggest difference was motivation. You saw a more fun-loving laid-back, no F's given Brock, and Farmer Brock was something that none of us knew we needed, but something we all love to see. Not gonna lie to you. Him coming back as this, at first I wasn't sure, but I like, I will say this, though probably would not like me for this, but I will say this was probably the most interesting Brock I had ever seen because he was having fun. He couldn't tell. He was having a good time. He didn't care. He was just shooting the shits, man, as they say. Like he was just having a great time and you can see it on television and people were loving it. So. Brock Lesnar was just living his best life. He was back to get some answers and he was back for blood. Now, just like that, a change in this story. Both guys with an undeniable aura and star presence, no whining about being Vince's boys, even though they're both Vince's boys. The suspense was all lying around where Paul Heyman's allegiance lied. This was really interesting in my opinion. Was it with Roman or was it with Brock? The past or the current? The suspense of this story took turns like Brock asking Paul, why didn't you tell Roman I was gonna be at SummerSlam? And then Roman kind of going, yo, I think Paul's a snake. To then reaffirming that Heyman was with Roman, but Brock insisted that Roman was getting played. So it was this flip-flop on the weekly of confusion that this whole time Heyman was with Reigns, but it was only a setup until Brock returned. All signs led to Heyman and Brock trying to get one over on Roman and all three parties involved deserve huge praise. Reigns, Heyman and Lesnar, they executed this so well. From Heyman's expressions to Reigns' mannerisms to Brock just having fun. So when Crown Jewel came, it was a question as to who was walking out the Universal Champion and who Heyman would help. Now, the matches haven't been the best for the most part. They've delivered some underwhelming duds, but this one at Crown Jewel just had a big fight feel around it. I think it's their second best one after WrestleMania 31. I will agree. I will definitely agree. The finish came when the rep was out, Heyman threw the title into the middle of the ring and he says, you know what to do with it, but we don't know who he's talking to. Both guys play tug-of-war with the title. Who says long-term booking is dead as he gets it, but as he turns, he's caught by the Usos followed by a championship shot to the face from Roman Reigns and Reigns gets the win and he walks out with Heyman. The only thing is I really wish he would have won clean, but we know why is so they could set up one more match with them at WrestleMania. That's really what it was to set up one more match at WrestleMania. And granted, he did win clean at WrestleMania, but he got injured in that match legit. So they had to call an audible, but I just always wanted him to beat Brock Lesnar clean. Finally, like in a sense of as a heel, to get the job done clean as a heel, if that makes any sense. But this wasn't over just yet. Brock got suspended and then his suspension was later lifted and one week, Reigns was lucky to be on TV and Brock and Heyman looked like they were still in on it. The company played it so hard, he ripped his pants. That was great. As Heyman two timing Reigns showing feelings for Brock. Anyways, later he even asked was it him or was it Brock? And Heyman says that he was protecting Reigns from Brock. And to add another shocking turn to this story, Reigns of fired Paul Heyman punching him in the face. They teased to Paul Heyman retirement and now there was more heightened drama heading into WWE day one. These two were set to main event for the Universal title and it should be noted that reports emerged that at day one, WWE we were looking at a finish that would justify a WrestleMania rematch between these two. Maybe involvement from Heyman or a completely screwy finish, but the match never ended up happening. Reigns tested positive for COVID-19, throwing the main event into disarray and throwing Brock into the WWE. Okay, I do believe they planned on still somehow having it where Brock and Roman were gonna main event WrestleMania, regardless if he caught COVID or not. If we're gonna do something, but he ended up catching COVID in the rest of his history. WWE title match. Here he beat Seth Rollins, Kevin Owens, Bobby Lashley and Big E to capture the WWE title. Bro! Oh, bro! I can't believe you put this in the video. Oh, bro, you're super solid for that, bro. That was, you made my day. You literally made my day with this clip. Oh my God! Oh, like, oh, bro. Oh, bro, I gotta show the homies this. Thank you for that, bro. That legit just made my day. This was awesome. We started to get really, really messy. Stories started to get sacrificed and some guys got even more annoyed. If that report is to be believed, these two were gonna fight for the Universal Championship regardless. It was supposed to be for just the Universal title at WrestleMania, but now Brock also had the WWE title. Post day one, Reigns returned and we still hadn't gotten this match. Brock made it evident that he wanted title for title. Heyman, after getting tossed aside, went to align with Brock again. Instead, both guys went off to do their own thing at the Rumble and it should be noted that story line wise, there were some hints of Heyman's allegiance still lying with Roman Reigns even though he was with Brock. At the Rumble, things in my opinion got really muddy with the storyline. Reigns won his match against Rollins and later in the night, there was a literal dream match for so many people. Lesnar versus Ashley, WWE title, but the match was instead used as a bridge to another Reigns versus Lesnar match. Reigns came in, he asked Heyman for the title. Heyman handed it to him and Lashley took the title off Brock after Reigns interfered. And so quickly, Heyman was back with Roman. From a storyline standpoint, this was really rushed. Just a month and a bit ago, they did the turn and now they accelerated things just to flip-flop back and forth. That same night, Lesnar won the Rumble and he chose to face Roman Reigns for the universal title, but before that at the elimination. Which was so, so. That's all I can say. In chamber, Brock won back the WWE title. So basically, WWE got rid of another potential WrestleMania world title feud so that these two could have a winner take all match. This was now blood for blood. These two for the third time would main event WrestleMania and to put that into perspective, the Rock and Stone Cold, they've had three WrestleMania matches. They've only main evented two of those. So Brock's playing real life, here comes the pain to get Roman's blood and this has now exhausted all areas of this storyline. Brock was just living his best life. He was having fun. He was one of the most entertaining parts of WWE. Come WrestleMania, they called this the biggest WrestleMania match of all time. That's not true. But when we got to this show, this match wasn't a repeat of WrestleMania 31 or even 34. It was the worst one in this trilogy. Reigns took the win in what's safe to say a really anti-climactic match. The match actually didn't feature any injuries. The report was that this is exactly how the company wanted things to go down. Regardless, Reigns won and he became. Really? I just find it hard to believe because of the way his shoulder look, bro. You can tell something was out. I don't know if he was selling it. It's just the way his shoulder look. It looked like it was knocked out of the socket, bro. Like it looked like it was dislocated.  Let me calm down. I wouldn't say it's trash, but for them to hype this up as the biggest main event of all time, that wasn't it, bro. That wasn't it. Came a double champion. And here he basically disappeared with sporadic appearances here and there. Now basically leaving WWE without a full-time world champion. And essentially holding both titles hostage. One of those appearances would be a title defense against Riddle where he retained and Brock would return again. So here we go again. The company has now announced that Brock Lesnar will take on Roman Reigns in a last man standing match for the last time ever in the main event of SummerSlam 2022. You already know it's gonna be 2050. It's gonna be the main event of WrestleMania 65. They're gonna have a wheelchair on a pole match for this new championship. These two men are in the best signature suggests and go to the end of time and nothing else is gonna happen. Oh my God. Now we're just aside, this rivalry has its positives and it has its negatives. I like to give you guys both sides and leave it up to you to form your own opinion. So let's do that. Let's first look at the positives. The first one being the history. There's stuff to play off from the past. This is a feud that's gone on for eight years. So framing this as their last match is a great way to put a stamp on everything. I hope so. Secondly, it's a last man standing match. They haven't had a stipulation match aside from a steel cage match one-on-one. So this, in my opinion, brings a lot of intrigue, especially because, think about it, are they gonna have Brock drop four straight to Roman Reigns? I think and hope it's a car crash and everything in sight gets broken and they end things off with a bang. Next up is a big one and one that a lot of people forget. This match draws the company money. Look at anything that involves- I know and this is the thing. I get it. This is going to bring them money. The problem here is because they have not invested as much as the people that are on their roster to bring in money, they have to resort to this. This is only WWE's booking fault. They would have invested time and effort into the people that they have or stop letting go to people that fans really care about. Maybe this wouldn't be happening. Maybe they wouldn't have to rely on Brock and Roman again. But to sell that stadium, they have to rely on them. And to be honest with you, I've heard they still have a problem selling it out because it's only so many times you can see this match. What was these two beat on YouTube or merchandise? It sells. I'm not a businessman, but if they're making money, they're succeeding. Who cares that this is the 50 millionth time they're giving you this match? To them, they're making money. And that's what's important to them. Think to yourself, who are the two biggest stars that they have at their disposal right now? And there's your answer. This is the biggest match that they can possibly put on right now. Also, I think it's been blown at a proportion that this rivalry has been bad per se. I don't think it's been bad. I do think those initial stages were a time where both guys struggled to give us something of substance. I think that those initial stages in 2015, 17, and 18, where Reigns hadn't really found his footing and Brock was basically unmotivated, drags things down a lot in retrospect, but since SummerSlam, it's been a really good rivalry. And the final positive I have for you is with the available stars since everyone under the sun seems to be injured, this seems like a contingency plan. And I think that people got to remember that they were thrown into this situation because Randy got injured. Because Cody got injured. So think about it.   I would have loved to have seen that match. Loved to have seen that match. And then we all know the ultimate goal definitely is Cody Rose. It's the ultimate end goal. And I hope it is still the ultimate end goal to have Cody be the guy to finish this all off. Maybe, I don't know. This is not what was supposed to happen. The original plan was- It may be a situation where Cody may just end up getting a title off of somebody else, which I'm okay with, but he may not be the guy to be Roman. So we don't know. It's gonna be Orton versus Reigns, a match that happened all the way back at SummerSlam 2014. And if it would have happened again, that would have been really exciting and refreshing. I know a lot of us would have been all for that. And it was really interesting to see what Lesnar would have done if he would have appeared at all. It's insane how injuries have changed the course of everything. Realistically, they want a big time drawing match that's gonna attract and say whatever you want. But like I said, this is that match. Now that we've pulled out some positives, let's look at the other side, the negatives. One of the things that I've mentioned this before is that they've exhausted every part of this rivalry from the whole veteran versus young guy angle to the whole mercenary versus saving hero of the masses to the story of where Haven's allegiance lies. Every corner has been covered by this on and off feud for the past eight plus years. And what more can you do? There's only so much you can do with a story like this. And instead of pivoting in directions like making it a multi-man match or having new stars in the fold, they continue to put themselves in a holding pattern. To add to that, you had Bobby Lashley versus Brock Lesnar. People had been wanting that match for ages, but instead you devalued that match and Lashley's title win, which leads me to the next con. And that's sacrificing others, championship reigns and storylines to put all your chips in this feud. At the 2022 elimination chamber, Brock Lesnar won the WWE title and that brought us to a unification match at Mania 38. So basically a world title feud at WrestleMania with someone else in that position who could have benefited from either holding or competing for a world title was sacrificed just so you could do this match again. And if you wanna build a strong foundation, you can't always go in one direction. I don't think the assessment I'm giving is an unfair one. They gotta move on from this and here's the biggest problem the WWE has. All the respect in the world for Roman Reigns, but to build him up as the end all be all, WWE has sacrificed a ton of superstars and they haven't let anyone get to his level or even sniff it. This is so true. It's basically Roman Reigns and everything else. And I get that he's your top star, all the power to you, but you could find yourself in a situation like you did with Cena. When Cena was leaving, you had to strap a rocket to Roman Reigns. That's development that you could be doing now rather than hot-shotting someone and having the fans potentially turn on said star like they did with Roman. Theoretically, let's say Brock was gonna wrestle Gunther this year. Let's say that would have benefited Gunther big time. Meanwhile, you call up Braun Breaker, you have him run through everyone for two months. Ultimately, he ends up losing via shenanigans to Reigns. You've now built intrigue for two new stars that will help move the company forward.  Gunther versus Brock? That's very intriguing. That's a match I would love to see. Gunther's a heel. Brock's a baby face. Very similar builds. Bruh, I would pay top dollar to see them go at it. And have Brock maybe put them over?  That would be great. Will WWE do it? I don't know. I don't know. When you're in there with guys like Lesnar and Reigns and if you wanna form a new nucleus of talent, that's your best way to go. Let them get acquainted with the audience rather than all right. It's 2025, we don't have Roman anymore. Who are we gonna strap the rocket to and who are they gonna boo for the next four years? Yeah. That's a problem you're gonna find yourself in. They need to move on from this feud have people slot in and out of feuds with guys like Brock and Roman. You can't go back and fix your mistakes.  Which is what I be saying. And that's the negatives I pull from this. They just gotta move on. They gotta build up new stars or they just gotta let new people come into the fold.  This rivalry will go down as a historic one with two of WWE's biggest stars ever. And like I said, we had Cena and Orton wrestle for what felt like every day and twice on Mondays. And now some of us missed that. Just enjoy it. There have been points where these two have killed it. That post-summer slam bill towards Crown Jewel in day one was really well done. I like that they made Heyman look vulnerable but everything's come in pockets. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad. Like I said, I'm excited for this match. As always, I wanna hear from you guys. Yeah man, this was a great video bro. Great video. I gotta go ahead and give this one a like man. The fact that you used us as a clip to the reaction of what happened when Brock won. Oh man, bro, that was great. That was legitimately great, bro that I appreciate you for using that clip man. But he makes some very fantastic, fantastic points. The feud has not always been bad but I think we're just tired. I would be okay with this being their last match.  End it in a spectacular fashion and I'm okay with it. And no more but it's WWE. It's all about the bottom dollar so I don't know about that. Comment down below, let me know. Do you guys believe this will be their last match in WWE, Brock versus Roman? Do y'all think at some point we will get another main event with these two? Let me know down below. I hope it's their last match but I don't put anything past WWE so I can see them having a match again. Probably sometime, maybe even this year, maybe even next year. Who knows? I can definitely see them having another match but I appreciate all of the support, bro. 290K, appreciate y'all kicking me. See y'all next one. Peace.


You're in center field when Bauer throws that ball over the so much I know I was I went on his podcast and I talked with him about the play you know at length. Trevor Bauer just had an awful no good no fun very bad bottom of the fifth inning and it all started with this Alex Gordon bloop shot dunks it in for a single nice piece of hitting. They got a five three lead the Indians do he gets this pop up to center field but the son fights Mercado he can't catch it. Bauer's like are you kidding me.  But what's what's did you see it because in the video it doesn't even seem like you know he threw it. Well what was that like. I knew they were taking him out. This is brutal. Next up a three two battle and he doesn't get the call ball four bases loaded no outs a little bloop right in front of home plate can't field it comes up empty.    I turned around and I was looking at the scoreboard and then as I'm looking at the scoreboard I just hear like a loud thumb. And then I looked over at Greg Allen and his not his blood is like over his ball covering it. I was like yo what just happened and then he goes he just chucked that ball and I was like no way.  And he said that's on me that's just my bad my bad. Yeah that's my bad.  And then he's going to Snoopy walk his way home sadness abounds. The first thing he did when he got in the dugout was he came up and apologized he was trying to feel that I wasn't trying to show you off at all and I was like it's OK I didn't think he was.  But really it was just like frustration at so much that happened. And that's what he said it was just out of frustration. He's a super competitive guy and just it just kind of happened. You look back at it now you just laugh about it. Yeah it's the one of the funniest things that happened in baseball.


Oh, this is Karl Ackerman, host of Journeys of the Mind. And today, we are so fortunate to have the wonderful Russell Modder, historian, and many other things, who is here today to talk about the Keebles Chair at Ilwani School. And for several decades now, Ilwani has had this wonderful chair, much like universities have chairs, and they invite people in. And I'm going to stop there because I want Russell Modder to tell us about the Keebles Chair. So Russell, give us a brief overview. And in so doing, I think you have a new title. Besides teacher, department chairman, head of the Elks for a while, the Elks Club in Waikiki. What is your new title? Well, Karl, it's a little bit premature to announce a new title, mainly because we haven't decided on that title yet. But I'm going to be facilitating speakers on campus beginning next year, not just the Keebles Chair, but some other speakers that we have on campus too. I'm not going to be the one choosing them, but I'm just going to handle logistics and things like that. But currently, right now, I'm the head of the Keebles Committee. That title is for certain. And I can talk a little bit about that committee if you'd like. I know that you were around at Eolani School when this whole idea of the Keebles Chair was conceived by Charlie Proctor. And basically what Charlie wanted to do was invite writers and also teachers of writing to Eolani School in honor Harold Keebles. And so it really began with a lot of small donations, but it has grown significantly since it began in 1982. And we've just had a wonderful list of speakers come through Eolani School halls, and they've interacted with students, and it's just been a great blessing for us, for our students, and also for the speakers themselves who come through and get a chance to visit Hawaii. Russell, that's great. And I'm glad that you mentioned the assistant headmaster and dean of the faculty, Charlie Proctor, because he did start it in 1982. And I remember that. I remember when he started that chair. Give us a sense of who the speakers have been. And if I'm not mistaken, one of the speakers at the end of his tenure you took out, I don't know if this is a true story or not, but you'll confirm it.  So it's good to be a speaker at Eolani School, but I'm going to be quiet now. Yeah. Well, you're speaking of Bob O'Mealy. Bob O'Mealy I met at Columbia University when I was able to spend a year at the Institute for Research in African-American Studies on a sabbatical year that Eolani helped fund. And it was one of the really great experiences of my academic career. And I took Bob's class. He's an English professor at Columbia, but also he's the guy who began the Center for Jazz Studies at Columbia. And I was really hooked on the idea of writing about music. And Bob was just a fantastic speaker and also a great scholar of Ralph Ellison, by the way. And so I thought, man, Bob would be so fantastic for our students to hear. And so I invited him. And he said, yeah, let's do this. So he spent two weeks with us. And on his final weekend, we took him out deep-sea fishing. That was something that he wanted to do. And we were really lucky that day. And Bob was in the seat for not more than 10, 15 minutes when he landed a really big fish. And it was just fantastic. So some of the other big fish that we've caught here at Eolani School for the Google Pay. Oh, great metaphor, Russell. But yeah, that thing. I thought I'd extend that metaphor a little bit, Carl. Of course, let me just go through the list here. Billy Collins, who was the poet laureate of the United States back in the early 2000s. He visited us in 2007. Lee Cataluna was with us in 2005. We've got two other wonderful Eolani graduates, Aaron and Jordan Kandel, who are Hollywood screenwriters. They came for our residency for two weeks back in 2018. Juan Felipe Herrera was also a poet laureate. And he was with us. Naomi Shehab Nye was with us earlier this year. So it's been a great run for us. We've had Richard Blanco here. We've had Juan Felipe Herrera here. Just recently, Naomi Shehab Nye was here visiting with us. And again, these are all two-week residencies. So students are getting wonderful opportunities to meet up with these great writers. But we've also brought in what we call Keebles Scholar honorees. And yeah, Billy Collins was Keebles' chairholder in 2007. He was the poet laureate along with Richard Blanco in 2017. Juan Felipe Herrera, also a poet laureate, he came through. And most recently, Naomi Shehab Nye, wonderful, wonderful poet. She was with us this January and first week of February. We've also got one-week stints at the school. We call them Keebles scholars. We've had Helen Jha, who was a great historian, writer of the Asian-American experience. We've had journalists Jelani Cobb and Jamel Buie. And coming up, we've got Imani Perry and Robin Kelly. And they'll be appearing on Tuesday night at CETO Hall at 6.30 PM. Tell us about these last two speakers, Russell, because they're coming in. So I think that as we get this audience out to many people in Tink-Tek, Hawaii, and that wonderful audience that it attracts, who are these guys? Yeah, so Imani Perry is most recently a recipient of the Genius Award that's offered by the, I want to say, MacArthur Foundation. But I don't think that's right. Yeah, MacArthur Foundation. OK. It is. And she's also the winner of the National Book Award. Robin Kelly, a really well-known scholar of African-American studies, whom I met at Columbia. He's going to be with us as well. And the topic for Tuesday night's session is going to be ideas and inquiry in the classroom. So as you know, history has been in the news lately. And a lot of states are proscribing some of the ideas that we can talk about in our history classes. AP African-American Studies was a controversial course in some states of Florida, as you probably know, chose not to offer it in the public schools in their state, along with a couple of other states too. I believe Arkansas was another one. And Imani Perry and Robin Kelly both have been involved in that national conversation. As scholars of African-American Studies, I think they're well-positioned to talk about these matters knowledgeably. So that's what we're going to be talking about on Tuesday night. It's not just African-American Studies either. I think it is about what we do in the history classroom generally. And that is talk about ideas, and we're engaged in the process of inquiry. It's interesting that you mentioned the African-American Studies class, because Eolani is the only school in Hawaii that's offering. Well, no, Carl. Let me just stop you. I found out that Mililani School is offering it as well. So Mililani is offering the African-American Studies. Yeah, so it's fantastic. That's fantastic. And I apologize to Mililani because I think it's absolutely wonderful. So two schools in Hawaii, Eolani, and Mililani. So that's really great. So give us a sense, Russell, of when a Keebles scholar or a Keebles representative comes into Hawaii and goes to Eolani, what's the interaction with the children? What's the interaction with the faculty? And what's the interaction with the community at large? Because it's very kind of Eolani to share these great people that they're paying for to bring in with the rest of the community. Right, well, thanks for that. Typically, we've got small classrooms, small classes at Eolani. So I think Charlie was really insistent that the students were the ones who were going to benefit most from our Keebles speakers. That's the whole point. So students are in these small environments with really special writers. And it can be really life-changing for some students, especially those kids who have aspirations to write creatively, write poetry. We've got aspiring screenwriters among our student body. So this is just fantastic opportunity for our students to interact with people who are practicing the craft of writing. And it's also great for our teachers. Teachers can pop in for visits to these classes. And they can learn, too, about how to approach that really important skill of writing. And then for every Keebles chair, we usually have a special community night where we invite the community to hear a presentation from our Keebles chair of the year. Keebles Scholar, we don't always offer that opportunity, but we thought that it was such a unique opportunity for us to share with the wider community on an issue that is really on the national, as part of a national conversation. Yeah. You mentioned Jelani Cobb. And of course, he writes for the New Yorker regularly, among other publications. So these are top-notch American scholars. Tell us a little bit about your last Keebles chair and how she interacted with the students. Give us some examples of what happened in the classroom and how she, because I heard that she was quite prolific, but also very kind to the kids. Oh, yeah. And I have to tell you, I'll confess to being a bit afraid of poetry myself. I teach some interdisciplinary courses here at Yolani from time to time. And I always get a little nervous when I'm teaching poetry because it's not, it's shaky ground for me. One of the things that Naomi really did was assure students that they could be a poet, that they could be poets.  And I thought that was just such a wonderful message for our students. And our students responded really positively. So on community night, what Naomi did was shared the stage with our student poets. So we had Hawaii's poet laureate invited to that night. And that was Naomi's suggestion. And alongside our student poets, and they got a chance to read their poetry in front of an audience and in front of a great poet like Naomi. So it was inspirational, just a delightful evening. Well, let's talk a little bit about one of the Keebles chair that actually was a duo. It was the Kendall brothers because they were Yolani students to begin with. And so what did they, because I think they're, if I'm not mistaken, they're screenwriters. So what did they produce recently that was kind of well-known? Well, I mean, everybody knows the movie Moana, right? And so, and by the way, the Kendall brothers, both of them were my students. So and I remember vividly some of what they actually wrote. Aaron, for instance, did a just a wonderful piece on Ralph Ellison's invisible man that I reminded him of the other night.  But they were brought on to the Moana project for a specific reason. The production had kind of lost its way a little bit on, I guess, a local angle, a Hawaii angle on this particular production. And they were brought in to kind of clean things up a little bit. And they just did a marvelous job with that. And we're really proud of them at Yolani School as alums. And they've been very, very generous too, not just with joining us as Keebles Chair, but also over the years spending time with our students and encouraging them in their pursuits of writing as a career, perhaps.  And just kids are working really hard and things like this. But when you talk about the Keebles Chair, it gives a view of Yolani as being sort of the center of all entertainment that's worthwhile, all intellectual entertainment that's worthwhile in Hawaii. Let me ask you a question about this. Because is there a sense, you being so involved with the Keebles Chair, that this fits in well with the Yolani one team?  I mean, I kind of yearn for those days because maybe I'm an old fovee or something like this. But does it fit in with the overall? How does it fit in with the overall ambiance and culture of Yolani at the Keebles Chair? Yeah, Carl, one of the goals of the school, and it's always been this way. I mean, going back to Reverend Dave Kuhn is we want to develop good people. That is a major priority for us. So kindness and humility and excellence too. Those things can go hand in hand. And it is a priority for us here at Yolani to make sure that students respect one another, that they recognize our common humanity, that they're good people, that they're kind people. Lord knows we need that in the world right now. And it's one of the things that I think our speakers remark on all the time is what great kids that we've got here at the school. You know, you can't do anything at normally at any school. This is a K through 12 school, Yolani, without the blessing of the headmaster or the principal. So let me ask you this. And I know that probably there are some of these guys that you were not around with because they were headmasters for a long time. But starting with David Kuhn, going to Tom Miller, Ballewashita, and now the headmaster, Tim Cottrell, what kind of sense and what kind of support do you think that these heads of school, well, in this case, one school, Yolani, what kind of support do you think they've given the Keebles chair? And of course, as we mentioned before, this was all started in 1982 by assistant headmaster of the very erudite, Charlie Brocker. Yeah, you know, Carl, it's a high point of our school year when our Keebles chairs and scholars arrive. But I think there's something else to beyond just the Keebles chair that we need to mention here. And Tim Cottrell has really been super supportive of us as a faculty. And it follows in the school's tradition of allowing teachers to teach courses that they feel strongly about. And I think it brings value to the classroom when I can teach a course like African-American studies that I think that students ought to know something about that history. If they're to know what it means to be an American, in my view, you've got to have a firm grounding in African-American history. In the humanities, we've got other courses, too. We still teach a Shakespeare course here. Dr. Peter Webb is a marvelous teacher of that course. But he's also developed a course on the literature of laughter and humor. And Tim has been very, very supportive about us teachers in the humanities, especially being able to teach to our passions. And that's something that the students recognize in the classroom, too. So our electives in the humanities are rich. And I think it's one of the dirty little secrets about Eolani. We typically think about Eolani as a math and science place, but we've got a strong humanities curriculum here. That's wonderful. I'm curious because we've talked about the kids and we've talked about the community. But I'd like to know a little bit more about how you think the Keebles chair benefits the faculty. And let me begin by saying that I encountered two gentlemen at Eolani back in the day. One was a guy named Christopher Strahan, who was a wonderful Latin teacher and did the SAT prep. And perhaps you should call him back because SATs are now being reinstated in many colleges. Right, right, right. And also there's a current math teacher named David Masanaga. And without qualification, I can say. And you know, I went to Berkeley. And so I met a lot of wonderful scholars there. But those two guys are equal to them. And what struck me, and I'll just be brief about this, is that Christopher Strahan would be teaching Latin and having his students sing Dylan or William Bootsie Collins, et cetera, et cetera. So he knew a lot about Latin. But he also knew a lot about rock and roll. And David, of course, does the geometric, universal geometrics and talks about architect, et cetera, et cetera. So you have renaissance mentioned. But anyway, going back to the question, how do you think the Keebles chair benefits the faculty?  Then to have, for example, Imani Perry and Robin Kelly come visit our school and talk about the issues of the day, especially as they relate to the courses that I'm teaching. And also our US history courses as well. I mean, I think that it really delivers the message to students that what I'm doing in the classroom and what I'm asking them to do and what they're doing is meaningful. And of course, teachers, I mean, we all benefit from hearing top scholars in our fields. I mean, I've never, I can't remember a Keebles scholar or a Keebles chair that I haven't learned a lot from. And so these are professional development sessions really when we have these great scholars come visit our classes. So let's get down to the nitty gritty here. Next Tuesday, how do people get to your forum? And it's our parking. And how early should people arrive and those sort of things, those details that can add to a wonderful lecture? Yeah, so there's parking right on Kamoku Street in our parking lot. The session will start at 6.30. You can come as early as 6 o'clock, if you'd like. Our jazz combo, student-led, will be playing a little bit of music beforehand. So it's open to the public, and we really want to see a nice turnout at Sito Hall that night. Russell, I wanted to, I'm going to ask you one more question. But I wanted to tell you that I was reading the February 26 New Yorker. And so you'll have an idea. The top of it has a bunch of people doing winter sporting events. And I was reading an article, and there's a poem by Billy Collins. And I thought to myself, this is a guy that was a Keebles chair, how appropriate. And so my last question for you is how in the world do you get these guys? Because someone like Billy Collins or Jelani Cobb, it's not as if they're not doing anything every day. And you're asking them to come to Hawaii, give. Of course, that's not a hard ask, but to give up two weeks of their lives and to talk to students and faculty. And I'm sure it gives them a lot of great pleasure, but it's enormously taxing. So how do you make the approach? I think that you have to ask. And that's what we do, Hawaii is not a bad place to be ever, but especially during these winter months. And I think that we probably do have a reputation for treating people well. And they enjoy their time with us. They enjoy our students. So the word of mouth on this is probably pretty important as well. But I think you just have to ask. You just have to ask. You never know. Aloha from Iolani School on the subject line is usually gets a response of some kind. OK, we only have less than a full minute left. So if you were to put into words from your personal perspective, that is Russell Mauder, why do you think the Keebles chair is important, not only for Iolani, but for Hawaii in general and perhaps the world? Oh, boy, I really think that at this particular moment that we're in, our common humanity is served when we talk to each other and when ideas are exchanged. And I think that's what the Keebles chair does so well. It's about sharing. And that's a perfect way to end. Thank you, Russell Mauder, for sharing the great things that the Keebles chair has done for Iolani, for the Hawaii community in general, and for the world. Thank you very much. And again, aloha to you, Russell, and aloha to all at Iolani School. Aloha, Carl. Mahalo for having me.


Ilford Delta 100. Today we're shooting it at 50. Come along. My name is David Patton. When I started photography, I wanted to make art. I wanted to be a landscape photographer. But with a family to feed and bills to pay, I decided it would be better to be a working photographer than a starving artist. So I took a job as a photojournalist. 25 years and thousands of assignments later, it was time to go back to my first love. It was time to follow my passion.  Whether it be film or digital, I will be sharing what I learned through my successes and my failures. In hopes to inspire and educate. This is my journey. This is Bright in the Edge. Delta 100 and ISO 50. It's the first time I've ever shot Delta 100 at 50. So I'm hoping to find out if there's a lot of difference with that approach. Exposed up to 100. So I probably shot it ISO 50 before, but I've never developed for it. So I'm curious to see if I shoot it at 50 and develop for 50, if there's going to be a lot of difference. Difference in the grain structure, sharpness, contrast. Those are all things I've been looking at. I go back and forth between Delta 100 and T-Max 100. And I'd like to kind of settle on one of the films. After a year, I still haven't decided which one I like better. With Kodak increasing its prices though, there's a little incentive to possibly use Delta 100. It seems to be more affordable right now. I don't have deep pockets, so wherever I can save a few bucks, I'm going to explore that. But my gut feeling has always been that T-Max just has a little bit finer grain. So I'm going to be looking a lot at the grain structure, shot at 50 and develop for 50 to see if there's really an improvement in that regard. When I shoot at 100, the grain isn't terrible. It has a pretty fine grain, but I wouldn't mind it just being a little bit finer. So right now I'm just trying to make a composition on this little waterfall. This is really more a test roll, but I kind of want to shoot something sort of interesting. Another first is I'm going to be using a different developer. I probably shouldn't do both things at the same time. This is the developer I got. I'm out of what I normally use. I have been using D76, or a generic version of it. What I think I'm using is probably going to be similar, but it's a liquid form. It's by Clayton, and it's F76+, so they claim it's a very fine grain developer. So I'm going to be shooting at 50 and developing with F76+, and going by, initially I'm going to go by the development times on the massive development chart. I think that's what it's called. So we'll see if those times are good. So for this shot, I've shot it with a 45mm and a 75mm, just to kind of get a different look. So 45 on the medium format camera is wide angle, and 75mm is normal focal length.  I've shot this with a polarizer and without a polarizer, but we'll see which one I like the best. Often I end up liking the one without the polarizer, when I'm shooting black and white. I tend to like that little bit of sparkle in the water, it just kind of gives a little more light to the image. Whereas in color, sometimes that's more of a distraction, at least that's how I feel about sometimes. The light's coming out, it's probably not really in my favor today. This is a test roll anyway, so I'm not going to stress out too much about it. You can see my results. I'm very curious to see if shooting at 50mm really makes a big difference. Who knows, this may be my go-to film in the future. I'm going to end today's video right here. So until next time, thanks for coming on for the ride. Before I end this video, I just wanted to hop on here and give my impressions and final thoughts on shooting Delta 150 and how I felt that the F76 Plus worked. What I'm seeing on these negatives is, it could be in my imagination, it could just be in my head, but it definitely looks like, to me, the grain is definitely a tighter, smoother structure, smoother appearance. And the negatives really look good, there's plenty of information. There are detail in the highlights, detail in the shadows. All these images scanned well, had no problems with that. I like what I'm seeing in this first roll.  After one roll, my gut feeling is that this film may work better for me at 50mm. I just really do like what I'm seeing in these test shots. This could be my go-to film in the future. I still have a few rolls of T-Max 100 left. I think once I get through those, I would probably, if it keeps going like this, I would probably just stick with the Elfer Delta 100 and just shoot it at 50mm.