Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Allyson Felix Robbed of Gold Medal by incomplete Olympics rules regarding diving versus leaning.

Update May 24, 2020: Not only do runners occasionally dive for the finish line, they also may lunge, or plunge for the finish line, yet no rules seem to exist for any of these out of the norm methods of finishing a race. The only ones who are governed by the rules appear to be the ones who run though and lean for the finish line. If rules were written for those who decide to "leave their feet", isn't it possible the criteria used to decide what part of the body constitutes crossing the finish line might be different? The reason a running lean at the finish is acceptable is because runners start the race in a somewhat similar position whether standing or when in the racing blocks for shorter distances. So if a different method than a running lean is allowed for the finish, then why not use a different set of criteria to determine what part of the body has to pass the finish line before the diving, lunging or plunging runner is considered "across" the finish line? - End of May 24, 2020 update.
--------------------------------------------

The definition of the word torso in present day vernacular should acknowledge the words Torque, Torsion, and Trunk. Torque is created by the pelvis region of the body, as is Torsion. And the Torso, also known as the trunk, as in the trunk of a tree that holds all the weight of the tree, is also found in the definition of the backend of a car, analogous to the pelvic region of a human being which supports all the weight above it.

However, since the lean at the finish line has long been accepted as a method for crossing the finish line in a track race, we should also consider that it has never been when the tip of a finger or the top of the head crosses the finish line.

Although AlexLOGIC still prefers which pelvis crosses the finish line first as the most authentic form of deciding a winner in a track race, the Olympic rules for crossing the finish line of a race as they presently stand are incomplete, and they failed Allyson Felix last night in her race against Shaunae Miller.

If both runners are upright at the finish line, then sure, use the lean rule as it presently stands to determine the winner, which I think refers to the chest area crossing the finish line, although it really should be when the pelvis crosses the finish line. 

But if one runner leans while the other runner dives, the diving runner's bottom part of the front of their pelvis crossing the finish line should be used to determine when the diving runner actually crossed the finish line.

Last time I checked runners don't run with their torsos parallel to the ground, so if a runner chooses to dive across the line, it should be the lowest front part of the pelvis that is used to determine when they actually cross the finish line. 

A lot of time and attention has been paid to the rules that govern the start of Olympic track races, however not enough time has been spent analyzing what part of the body should be the point at which a runner officially crosses the line when they dive across the line.  

Allyson Felix's pelvis is actually ahead of Shaunae Miller's pelvis as Miller is about to dive across the finish line, yet Miller's time is recorded as being 7 one hundredth's faster than Felix's time, and AlexLOGIC finds that to be illogical, and incorrect.

Allyson Felix was robbed of a gold medal by a pedantic misunderstanding of what a torso actually is in real life on a real, living person, and Allyson Felix was also robbed of a gold medal by allowing runners who dive to have the wrong part of their body used to determine when they have crossed the finish line.

If runners are allowed to use two different methods to cross the finish line, then it is logical to assume that there might need to be two different methods used to determine when each runner actually officially crosses the finish line.



If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Friday, August 12, 2016

The Robot Revolution and the 15 Dollar Minimum Wage.

The harder people fight for a 15 dollar minimum wage, the faster their jobs will be taken over by robots. We've seen videos of robots that frankly remind me of the RoboCop movie. The movements are eerily fast, smooth, and scariest of all, very balanced.

The 15 dollar an hour fight is why progressives bug me and why I am a moderate instead. The formula for the minimum wage is one that uses the national hourly average, and cuts it in half. The national hourly average is around 24 dollars an hour, so the minimum wage should max out at 12 dollars, with variances in each state based on the acknowledged wage scale in the suburbs versus the big cities.

I would raise the minimum wage to 10 dollars an hour immediately for most places, then offer an incentive in which the wage is raised every so often by 50 cents. The idea of a newbie getting 15 bucks an hour is absolutely ridiculous and insane. 

The idea of a worker who started out at 10 bucks an hour and by staying at the same place raised their wage in 50 cent increments to 12 or 13 dollars an hour, makes a lot more sense.



If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Cincinnati Zoo Gorilla Protocol left out one important detail about the death of Harambe.

Opposing viewpoints in the Cincinnati Zoo Gorilla tragedy can cite evidence from the video that was shot to bolster their own position.

AlexLOGIC would like to suggest that an additional protocol be taken if this type of scenario ever happens again. MOVE THE ONLOOKERS back and away from the scene of the problem. I would allow anyone videotaping the incident to keep videotaping as long as they remain quiet.

If all the onlookers had been immediately moved away, the ensuing silence might have provided less agitation to Harambe, the 17 year old Gorilla who was put in the unenviable position that no matter what he did, people were yelling at him. 

Would silence have changed Harambe's demeanor? Of course we'll never know, but in the future the first step that should be taken is to lessen the impact the sounds of human screams may have in a zoo setting to any animal suddenly caught in an unusual situation.


If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Monday, May 30, 2016

How the NBA, MLB, and NHL have screwed up their Television contract deals.

Today is memorial day, a day to remember that millions of american soldiers sacrificed their own comfort, and in many instances their lives, whether they wanted to or not. Many times we only focus on those who "gave" their lives, or "sacrificed" their health as a soldier. The presumption being that they wanted to either give or sacrifice their lives. I would suggest it does not matter whether a soldier wants to sacrifice, or not, if their lives were forever altered by being in a war time situation, it's an epic act.

There are probably veterans out there who cannot afford cable tv and are also big time sports fans. It seems cruel that people who actually put their life on the line in war, can't even sit in their own residence on Memorial day and enjoy the seventh game of the NBA Western Conference finals between Golden State and Oklahoma City, because it is only on cable. I just find this so offensive and I'm not a vet.

The irony of doing lip service at each and every professional game that is played by singing the national anthem. In baseball, there is even a seventh inning stretch God Bless America.  Yet Veterans can't even turn on a television and watch a ballgame after putting their lives on the line.

What is even more freakishly wrong about this situation is its just bad capitalism. No matter what deal professional sports works out with the television industry, veterans should be allowed to watch playoff games even if they can't afford to pay for cable.

As for the rest of the country, the free-TV'rs who miss out on 75% of all playoff games of the NBA, MLB and NHS  because they are only on cable tv, one would think the NBA, MLB, and NHL would provide some type of rider in their contract in which a network could put sports programming on their free tv channels if its obvious that the audience would explode.

These sports conglomerates enjoy many perks because they are free to run their sports empires without being under the  magnified eye of the federal government with the exceptions being scrutinized for safety, health and fraud issues. It seems that since our professional sports system enjoys many tax free perks, that the least they would do is offer more free tv options, most definitely for all veterans, and even for the american who cannot afford cable tv.

Which brings  us to the seventh game of the Golden State vs Oklahoma NBA western conference. Irrespective of how well the ratings are for TNT, the ratings would be five times higher if the game was simulcast on a major network. One would thing some creative contracting would reward TNT handsomely for "sharing" the game with a network, while still reaping rewards for the network, free tv fans, and our vets.

If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Police Perform Completely Unnecessary Execution by Firing Squad in San Francisco, they could learn a lesson from Charlie's Angels.

What's really wrong with this video of a man being executed by a large group of police officers? 


The police officers appear to have no fear that something bad could be happening behind them. All the officers are staring down one man who is against a wall because he may have previously attacked somebody with a knife, but the police people's backs are exposed and unprotected against any possible action that could occur behind them.

In essence, the more than half a dozen police officers have no fear about anything behind them, just what is in front of them, which means this should have more easily been de-escalated than death by firing squad.

Maybe the police can take a clue from Charlie's Angels.  

Even though there is a fiery explosion in the background, the Three Angels, unlike the over half a dozen donut fueled police officers, are facing in opposite directions to ensure there are no additional threats besides the OBVIOUS one in the background. That's how real security enforcement works, there is no lets all gather around a guy who is standing against a building and all fire on him at the same time.


If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Add Any