#triple h is the only valid result

[healthy143]

Power Bull CBD Gummies : Shocking Report, Ingredients & Side Effects?

All guys who are having sexual problems, listen up! Once you start taking Power Bull CBD Gummies, you can feel like a guy again. With this healing formula, you will no longer have to deal with embarrassing words or moments in bed. With this great recipe, your sex drive will go up and your staying power will last all night and all day. Taking these sweets will be your dream job because they will make you the strongest man in the world. You don't have to live a life of shame and pain because you can't get it up. Take advantage of the deal that is only valid this week. Click on any picture on this page to get the best price on Power Bull+ CBD Gummies right away.

You don't have to go through a time when you don't enjoy being sexual. CBD has been shown to help with sexual problems that get in the way of your sex life. Power Bull CBD Gummies are the only way to forever boost your libido and improve your sexual performance. Do not believe what doctors or ads say. These are the most popular candies for men's health on the market right now. We promise that once you try these, you won't be let down. 

►Visit The Official Website To Get Your Bottle Now◄

How Much Does Power Bull CBD Cost?

The price of Power Bull CBD Gummies is nothing compared to the price of being embarrassed sexually. There is no way that these great treats won't help you, whether you want to grow your hair or make it last longer. You will get better beyond your wildest dreams without the help of doctors or surgeons. We all hate having to go in for a checkup every year. We can promise that taking these won't feel like one of those checkups. You can be sure that you will get the best healing and that your sexual skills will grow. Once you start taking these great, energizing gummies, you feel like you are 21 again. Men who use them say they can see results in as little as five days. This means you will also see results quickly and clearly.

Power Bull CBD Gummies will send their power through your blood and to all the right places. Studies have shown that using these regularly will help you feel less anxious and more confident in the bedroom. This means you'll be a triple threat in the bedroom. What comes next is a normal rise in libido. The benefits of these things have a trickle-down effect. Once you notice a change in how your body works, another change is generally not far behind. We promise that if you start doing these things every day, your sex drive will go through the roof!

►Visit The Official Website To Get Your Bottle Now◄

What's in Power Bull CBD?

The ingredients in Power Bull CBD Gummies will fix your sexual problems and help you do better in bed. Age makes a big difference in how we have sex. If your sexual life has gone wrong, using these regularly can help you get it back on track.  If you have ED or other sexual problems, you can be sure that taking these gummies will fix everything and make your penis feel brand new. Men often say that worry, anxiety, and aging are the main causes of sexual decline. If you are suffering from any of these diseases, you can find real healing in these When you feel bad about getting older and having less sexual power, your energy and staying power are sure to go down and never come back. To get your man skills, you don't have to reach into the toilet.

Payson M. gives his review of Power Bull CBD Gummies.

"I couldn't last in physical situations, and it didn't matter how strong I was, I couldn't make it work. Since I started taking Power Bull CBD Gummies, I feel stronger and like I can last much longer. This really does work."

►Visit The Official Website To Get Your Bottle Now◄

Tyler H.

"I've always had problems with my sexuality, and therapy has never helped. I didn't want to go to the doctor or have surgery, so I was fine with just living with it until I found Power Bull CBD Gummies online. I ordered a bottle, and it showed up at my door a few days later. I broke the bottle open and have been eating a Power Bull CBD Gummies candy every day since. I can feel it in my body."

Make Yourself Stronger!

Don't let anyone but yourself touch your man parts. Stay true to being a man and don't give up. Today is the best time to try Power Bull CBD Gummies for the best benefits and more privacy. If you want to be one of the thousands of guys who enjoy the powerful effects of Power Bull CBD Gummies, you should order a bottle as soon as possible. We recommend that you click on any of the pictures on this page to get the best price on Power Bull CBD Gummies now and avoid having to wait.

If you want to Order, Click Here

►Visit The Official Website To Get Your Bottle Now◄

#PowerBullCBDGummies

#PowerBullCBDGummiesUses

#PowerBullCBDGummiesReviews

#PowerBullCBDGummiesSideEffects

#PowerBullCBDGummiesCost

#PowerBullCBDGummiesPrice

#PowerBullCBDGummiesIngredients

#PowerBullCBDGummiesHowToUse

#PowerBullCBDGummiesBuy

#PowerBullCBDGummies300Mg

#PowerBullCBDGummies1000Mg

#PowerBullCBDGummiesOrder

#PowerBullCBDGummiesResults

#PowerBullCBDGummiesBenefits

#PowerBullCBDGummiesWhereToBuy

#PowerBullCBDGummiesHowToOrder

#PowerBullCBDGummiesResults

#PowerBullCBDGummiesWork

☘📣Facebook Pages😍😍👇

☘📣Jimdo Site😍😍👇

☘📣Site Google😍😍👇

☘📣More Refrences😍😍👇

[cladeymoore]

FROST: Flexible Round-Optimized Schnorr Threshold Signatures

By Daniel Zhou

FROST is a round-optimal threshold Schnorr signature protocol. Here we introduce why Coinbase decided to use FROST, what FROST is, and what we discovered while evaluating FROST.

Why FROST?

In order to improve efficiency of Coinbase’s threshold-signing systems, we decided to explore the FROST threshold Schnorr signature protocol, which features the following advantages over other Schnorr-based threshold signature protocols [GJKR03, SS01]:

Low round complexity in both the distributed key-generation and signing phases. The distributed key generation phase can be completed in 2 rounds. The signing phase can be completed in less or equal to 3 rounds depending on whether we use a signature aggregator role and a preprocessing stage. That is,

1-round signing with a trusted signature aggregator and a preprocessing stage.

2-round signing with a trusted signature aggregator, but no preprocessing stage.

3-round signing without a trusted signature aggregator and no preprocessing stage.

Concurrent security. The signing phase is secure when performed concurrently. That is, an unlimited number of signature operations can be performed in parallel. In contrast with other threshold Schnorr signature protocols, there are existing Schnorr-based threshold signature protocols, such as [GJKR03, SS01], that have the same round complexity, but they suffer from limited concurrency to protect against the attack of Drijvers et al. [DEF19]. This attack was originally proposed in a Schnorr multi-signature n-out-of-n setting, but it also applies similarly in a threshold t-out-of-n setting with the same parameters for an adversary that controls up to t-1 participants. We refer readers to section 2.6 of the FROST draft for more details. To prevent this attack without limiting concurrency, FROST binds each participant’s response to a specific message as well as the set of participants and their set of elliptic curve (EC) points used for that particular signing operation. In doing so, combining responses over different messages or EC point pairs results in an invalid signature, thwarting attacks such as those of Drijvers, et al.

Secure against dishonest majority. FROST is secure against adversaries which control up to t-1 signers in the signing phase.

Simple cryptographic building blocks and assumptions. FROST is built upon the threshold Shamir secret sharing and Feldman verifiable secret sharing schemes and it relies only on the discrete logarithm assumption.

How does FROST work?

Before we introduce how FROST works, we first recall how the standalone Schnorr signature works.

A Schnorr digital signature algorithm is a triple of algorithms: (KeyGen, Sign, Verify).

Let G be a group generator of a cyclic group with prime order p, and let H be a cryptographic hash function mapping to the field Zₚ* . A Schnorr signature is generated over a message m by the following steps:

KeyGen -> (sk, vk)

Randomly sample the secret key sk <- Zₚ.

Return (sk, vk = sk * G).

Sign(sk, m) -> sig

Randomly sample a secret nonce k <- Zₚ.

R = k * G

c = H(m, R)

z = k + sk * c (mod p)

Return signature sig = (z, c)

Verify(vk, m, sig) -> true/false

Parse sig = (z’, c’)

R’ = z * G -c * vk

c’ = H(m, R’)

Return true if c = c’, otherwise return false.

We call (sk, vk) the secret and verification keys respectively. We call m the message being signed and sig the Schnorr digital signature.

FROST is a threshold Schnorr signature protocol that contains two important components. First, n participants run a distributed key generation (DKG) protocol to generate a common verification key; at the end, each participant obtains a private secret key share and a public verification key share. Afterwards, any t-out-of-n participants can run a threshold signing protocol to collaboratively generate a valid Schnorr signature. The figure below gives a high-level sketch of how FROST works in the case of t = 3 and n = 5.

(3, 5) — FROST DKG + Threshold Signing Overview

In the following context, we introduce FROST distributed key generation and threshold signing in more technical details.

FROST — distributed key generation (DKG). The secret signing key in Schnorr signature is an element in the field Zₚ. The goal of this phase is to generate long-lived secret key shares and a joint verification key. This phase is run by n participants. FROST builds its own key generation phase upon Pedersen’s DKG [GJKR03], in which it uses both Shamir secret sharing and Feldman’s verifiable secret sharing schemes as subroutines. In addition, FROST also requires each participant to demonstrate knowledge of their own secret by sending to other participants a zero-knowledge proof, which itself is a Schnorr signature. This additional step protects against rogue-key attacks in the setting where t ≥ n/2.

At the end of the DKG protocol, a joint verification key vk is generated. Also, each participant Pᵢ holds a value (i, skᵢ) that is their long-lived secret share and a verification key share vkᵢ = skᵢ*G. Participant Pᵢ’s verification key share vkᵢ is used by other participants to verify the correctness of Pᵢ’s signature shares in the signing phase, while the verification key vk is used by external parties to verify signatures issued by the group.

FROST — threshold signing. We now introduce the signing protocol for FROST. This phase builds upon known techniques that employ additive secret sharing and share conversion to non-interactively generate the nonce for each signature. This phase also leverages binding techniques to avoid known forgery attacks without limiting concurrency.

Our implementation is slightly adapted from the FROST draft. In our implementation, we opted to not use the signature aggregator role. Instead, each participant is a signature aggregator. This design is more secure: all the participants of the protocol verify what others have computed to achieve a higher level of security and reduce risk. In contrast with other open source libraries, as far as we know, we are the first to implement FROST without the signature aggregator role. Furthermore, we have chosen not to do the (one-time) preprocessing stage in order to speed up the implementation. In the preprocessing stage, each participant prepares a fixed number of EC point pairs for further use, which is run for a single time for multiple threshold signing phases. However, we take this stage as an additional round and only prepare a single pair of EC points, which means we run it every time for each threshold signing phase. In more detail, there are two major differences between our implementation and the original draft.

First, the signature aggregator, as described in the draft, validates messages that are broadcast by cosigners and computes the final signature. In our implementation, we do not use such a role. Instead, each participant simply performs a broadcast in place of a signature aggregator performing coordination. Note that FROST can be instantiated without such a signature aggregator as stressed in the draft. Also, implementing it in a decentralized way is more appropriate to Coinbase’s multiparty computation approach.

Second, the protocol in the draft uses a preprocessing stage prior to signing, where each participant Pᵢ samples a sequence number, say Q, of single-use nonces (dᵢⱼ, eᵢⱼ), computes and broadcasts pairs of public points (Dᵢⱼ = dᵢⱼ*G, Eᵢⱼ = eᵢⱼ*G) for further use in subsequent signing rounds, where j = 1….Q. This preprocessing stage is a once-for-all stage. That is, each participant can prepare a fixed number of EC point pairs, say Q, and broadcast them to the signature aggregator, then the signature aggregator distributes these EC point pairs to all participants for further use. Once these pairs of EC points are used up, then these participants should run another preprocessing stage. Since we opted to not use such a signature aggregator role in our implementation, we have chosen instead to let each participant generate a single pair of EC points (Dᵢ, Eᵢ). Therefore, there is no preprocessing stage in our implementation and thus there are 3 rounds in our threshold signing phase instead of 2. Also note that whether our implementation contains the preprocessing stage or not simply depends on how many EC point pairs are generated in signing round 1. If each participant generates a Q number of EC point pairs in the signing round 1, then this round can be viewed as the preprocessing stage and our implementation becomes a 2-round signing protocol.

We describe how these three signing rounds work and give some technical details.

Signing Round 1. Each participant Pᵢ begins by generating a single private nonce pair (dᵢ, eᵢ) and corresponding pair of EC points (Dᵢ, Eᵢ) and broadcasts this pair of points to all other participants. Each participant stores these pairs of EC points received for use later. Signing rounds 2 and 3 are the actual operations in which t-out-of-n participants cooperate to create a valid Schnorr signature.

Signing Round 2. To create a valid Schnorr signature, any t participants work together to execute this round. The core technique behind this round is t-out-of-t additive secret sharing. This technique creates the secret nonce k = SUM(kᵢ), which is the same value generated in the single-party Schnorr signing algorithm, and each kᵢ is the share computed by participant Pᵢ. To do this, each participant prepares the set of pairs of EC points B = (D₁, E₁)……(Dₜ, Eₜ) received in round 1, and then computes kᵢ = dᵢ+eᵢ*rᵢ , where rᵢ=H(i, m, B) and H is a hash function whose outputs are in the field Zₚ. Computing rᵢ is important since it works as a binding value for each participant to prevent the forgery attack. Then each participant computes the commitment Rᵢ=Dᵢ+Eᵢ*rᵢ such that it binds the message m, the set of signing participants and each participant’s EC points to each signature share, such that signature shares for one message cannot be used for another. This prevents the forgery attack because attackers cannot combine signature shares across distinct signing operations or permute the set of signers or published points for each signer. The commitment for the set of signers is then simply R = SUM(Rᵢ). As in single-party Schnorr signatures, each participant computes the challenge c = H(m, R).

Having computed the challenge c, each participant is able to compute the response zᵢ to the challenge using the single-use nonces (dᵢ, eᵢ) and the long-term secret shares skᵢ, which are t-out-of-n (degree t-1) Shamir secret shares of the group’s long-lived key sk. One main observation that FROST leverages is that if kᵢ are additive shares of k, then each kᵢ/Lᵢ are t-out-of-n Shamir shares of k, where Lᵢ is the Lagrange coefficient for participant Pᵢ. That is, Lᵢ = prod(i/(j-i)), where j = 1,…,t, j ≠i. This observation is due to the work by Benaloh and Leichter [BL88] and the work by Cramer, Damgaard and Ishai [CDI05]. They present a non-interactive mechanism for participants to locally convert additive shares generated via the Benaloh and Leichter t-out-of-n secret sharing construction to Shamir’s polynomial form. FROST uses the simplest t-out-of-t case of this transformation. Thus kᵢ/Lᵢ+skᵢ*c are degree t-1 Shamir secret shares of the correct response z = k+sk*c for a plain (single-party) Schnorr signature. Using share conversion again and the value each participant has computed (namely, kᵢ = dᵢ+eᵢ*rᵢ), we get that zᵢ=dᵢ+eᵢ*rᵢ+Lᵢ*skᵢ*c are t-out-of-t additive shares of z. At the end of signing round 2, each participant broadcasts zᵢ to other participants.

Signing Round 3. After receiving zᵢ from all other participants, each participant checks the consistency of these reported zᵢ, with their pair of EC points (Dᵢ, Eᵢ) and their verification key share vkᵢ. This can be done by checking the equation zᵢ*G = Rᵢ+c*Lᵢ*vkᵢ. Once all zᵢ are valid, then each participant computes z = SUM(zᵢ) and output (z, c) as the final Schnorr signature. This signature will verify properly to any party unaware that FROST was used to generate the signature, and can check it with the standard single-party Schnorr verification equation with vk as the verification key. As we have mentioned, we do not use the signature aggregator role in our implementation. Thus, each participant works as a signature aggregator. Therefore, we let each participant self-verify its own signature before outputting it.

Implementation Challenges

We referred to some known FROST implementations: two Rust implementations — one by ZCash foundation and another by frost-dalek — but they are not appropriate to our tech stack. One Golang implementation is from the Taurus group, but unfortunately this Go implementation is not ready for production use and has not been externally audited. As a result, we decided to implement the protocol in-house.

One feature of FROST signing is that each participant must know Lagrange coefficients for each participant in order to compute zᵢ. This is uncommon in other threshold signature protocols that use Feldman verifiable secret sharing as a sub-protocol, so there are few existing Go libraries to support THIS. Most existing libraries support generating secret shares, polynomials, and their interpolation, but do not support Lagrange coefficient computation. To fill in this technical gap, we implemented participants’ Lagrange coefficients given arbitrary t participant IDs as input. Before running the threshold signing protocol, it takes input IDs of the t participants and generates all Lagrange coefficients. As the FROST draft suggests, we assign these coefficients to each participant before signing to improve performance.

Summary

FROST is a flexible, round-optimized Schnorr threshold signature scheme that minimizes the network overhead of producing Schnorr signatures in a threshold setting while allowing for unrestricted parallelism of signing operations and only a threshold number of signing participants. We introduce FROST, highlight its features, and describe it in a fully decentralized approach (i.e., without any third-party signature aggregator). This post exposes what Coinbase discovered while evaluating and implementing the FROST protocol and we look forward to adding it to our suite of threshold signing services.

If you are interested in cutting-edge cryptography, Coinbase is hiring.

FROST: Flexible Round-Optimized Schnorr Threshold Signatures was originally published in The Coinbase Blog on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

from Money 101 https://blog.coinbase.com/frost-flexible-round-optimized-schnorr-threshold-signatures-b2e950164ee1?source=rss----c114225aeaf7---4 via http://www.rssmix.com/

[sbknews]

Triumph To Power Moto2 For Another Three Years

Triumph Motorcycles will continue to provide their record-breaking 765cc triple powerplants as Exclusive Engine Supplier to the FIM Moto2™ World Championship for another three seasons, from 2022-2024. Since the start of the 2019 season, Triumph Motorcycles has provided all of the teams with race-tuned 765cc triples, each of which is based on the class-leading Street Triple RS engine. With developments that allow it to breathe more freely, rev harder and deliver a peak power output of more than 140PS (an increase of over 17% on the production engine). This 765cc triple brought to the category a much-welcomed boost in power, transforming the performance and level of competition. Following Dorna’s intent to bring the Moto2™ series closer to MotoGP™, the increase in power and torque, combined with a more advanced electronics package, has provided a more relevant training and development ground, whilst enhancing the overall racing in its own right.

In the last two years Moto2™ graduates have gone on to take podiums and victories in their first seasons in the premier MotoGP class: 2019 Moto2™ World Champion Alex Marquez taking a pair of second places in 2020, and title rival Brad Binder with a victory also in 2020 and more recently in Austria 2021. Jorge Martin took his first Moto2™ victory in 2020, followed a year later with his maiden MotoGP™ win and a further two podiums in 2021. These incredible results go to prove how Moto2™ has become the natural springboard for MotoGP™ that Dorna envisaged. Redefining the category, records have also fallen across the board. As well as 14 different race winners since 2019 there have been lap records set at 34 events, including records which have been broken and re-broken year-on-year, and the first ever 300+km/h top speed for a Moto2™ machine. The record stands at 301.8km/h at Phillip Island, Australia. Reflecting these great successes, the wonderful feedback and partnerships we have had with the riders and their teams, and the incredible response from Triumph fans across the world, we have decided in partnership with Dorna, along with the continuing support of Externpro, to extend our relationship and sign a new contract for another three years of racing.

Steve Sargent, Triumph Motorcycles Chief Product Officer ”Moto2 has been the perfect environment to showcase, and prove the reliability and performance advantages of, our triple engines, where we have seen the top 20 qualifying times consistently come within a second of each other. Not only has it raised our profile and credibility on the world stage, for me the success of Moto2 has also been an incredible catalyst, reigniting the passion for racing within Triumph motorcycles. I am delighted to have played a part in this landmark activity for Triumph and excited to see the extension to another 3 seasons. We are committed to delivering further improvements to the performance of the engines, which we are sure will be appreciated by both the riders and the teams.

Carlos Ezpeleta, Dorna Sports Managing Director, said: “Our first years together have been a wonderful success and I’d like to thank Triumph for their help and hard work over these first three years - especially during the pandemic. The FIM, IRTA and Dorna are happy with the results this project has shown and it’s validated the consistency of the steps between Moto3™, Moto2™ and MotoGP™. Overall, we are pleased with the partnership and we look forward to three more exciting years together.”

Checkout our dedicated Triumph Motorcycles News page Triumph Motorcycles News/ or head to the official Triumph Motorcycles website triumphmotorcycles.co.uk Follow us on social media: Instagram: @superbikenews Twitter: @sbknews Facebook: @superbikenews

SBN Directory - add your motorcycle related business here

Click here for more info on Arai Helmets

Click here for more info on Xena Security

Click here for more info and to buy Biker T-Shirts

Grid Girls UK If you would like to receive our headlines daily to your email inbox then sign up to our newsletter: Here Subscribe to our news channels: Here

Read the full article

[annieboltonworld]

Juniper Publishers- Open Access Journal of Environmental Sciences & Natural Resources

Virtual Extensible Theory for Agents

Authored by Sebastian Leuzinger

Abstract

Many cryptographers would agree that, had it not been for wide-area networks, the deployment of Smalltalk might never have occurred. After years of technical research into fiber-optic cables, we validate the investigation of active networks. We disconfirm that while extreme programming [1] can be made low-energy, cacheable, and Bayesian, the foremost interposable algorithm for the understanding of the World Wide Web by Sato et al. is optimal.

Introduction

The programming languages solution to DNS is defined not only by the development of Markov models, but also by the practical need for superblocks. The notion that steganographers co-operate with cacheable epistemologies is often useful. Along these same lines, the notion that researchers interfere with embedded algorithms is rarely encouraging. On the other hand, Markov models alone can fulfill the need for cache coherence. In this work we use probabilistic information to disconfirm that 16 bit architectures can be made “fuzzy”, interactive, and perfect [2]. But, existing psychoacoustic and “smart” frameworks use classical theory to allow compact epistemologies. Our heuristic is NP-complete. This is essential to the success of our work. Without a doubt, existing scalable and highly-available applications use reliable technology to enable com-pact archetypes. Existing metamorphic and virtual systems use certifiable communication to locate robust epistemologies. This combination of properties has not yet been explored in prior work. In this position paper we introduce the following contributions in detail.

We introduce a ubiquitous tool for exploring Smalltalk (Tig), which we use to prove that IPv6 can be made cacheable, mobile, and Bayesian. Second, we verify that agents can be made knowledge-based, linear-time, and extensible. We show not only that the Ethernet can be made client-server, ubiquitous, and unstable, but that the same is true for Markov models. Finally, we argue that while the acclaimed linear-time algorithm for the study of Markov models [3] is Turing complete, the little-known constant-time algorithm for the simulation of vacuum tubes by Rodney Brooks [4] runs in H(log log N!] time. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. To start off with, we motivate the need for IPv4 [5]. To overcome this issue, we verify not only that symmetric encryption and rasterization can collude to fulfill this objective, but that the same is true for flip-flop gates. Finally, we conclude.

Related Work

The concept of read-write information has been visualized before in the literature [6-8]. The seminal framework by Sato and Jackson does not prevent the synthesis of architecture as well as our method [9]. Suzuki and Wang explored several low- energy approaches, and reported that they have limited lack of influence on hash tables [10,11]. Unfortunately, these methods are entirely orthogonal to our efforts. While we know of no other studies on distributed information, several efforts have been made to simulate multi-processors. A recent unpublished undergraduate dissertation [12] explored a similar idea for highly-available modalities [7]. We had our solution in mind before C. Maruyama et al. published the recent famous work on the improvement of superblocks [2,13-16].

Thusly, despite substantial work in this area, our solution is perhaps the frame-work of choice among mathematicians [17]. Contrarily, the complexity of their method grows exponentially as loss less methodologies grows. Though we are the first to present linear-time information in this light, much related work has been devoted to the study of Boolean logic. Continuing with this rationale, a decentralized tool for enabling rasterization proposed by Deb-orah Estrin [18] fails to address several key issues that Tig does solve. Contrarily, the complexity of their method grows logarithmically as context-free grammar grows. Our method is broadly related to work in the field of machine learning [19], but we view it from a new perspective: highly- available theory [20]. We believe there is room for both schools of thought within the field of operating systems. Further, the original approach to this quagmire by Harris was significant; nevertheless, it did not completely address this quandary. The only other noteworthy work in this area suffers from fair assumptions about cache coherence [18,21,22]. Instead of deploying authenticated epistemologies, we accomplish this aim simply by visualizing peer-to-peer modalities. Our design avoids this overhead. Ultimately, the heuristic of Zhou and Sato [23] is a key choice for the evaluation of access points (Figure 1).

Principles

In this section, we construct a design for emulating embedded archetypes. This may or may not actually hold in reality. The model for Tig consists of four independent components: the Internet, the simulation of Scheme, congestion control, and the simulation of checksums. Though computational biologists mostly assume the ex-act opposite, our methodology depends on this property for correct behavior. Any confirmed development of super pages [15] wills clearly re-quire that Smalltalk [24] and extreme programming can cooperate to answer this riddle; our system is no different. This may or may not actually hold in reality. The question is, will Tig satisfy all of these assumptions? Yes, but only in theory. Our method relies on the theoretical methodology outlined in the recent well-known work by James Gray in the field of crypto analysis. Tig does not require such an essential development to run correctly, but it doesn’t hurt. Of course, this is not always the case. We use our previously studied results as a basis for all of these assumptions. Despite the fact that leading analysts continuously postulate the exact opposite, Tig depends on this property for correct behavior.

Implementation

In this section, we explore version 6.7, Service Pack 1 of Tig, the culmination of days of de-signing [25-27]. The server daemon and the virtual machine monitor must run in the same JVM. The hacked operating system contains about 9708 lines of Java. Tig is com-posed of a collection of shell scripts, a homegrown database, and a server daemon. Further, it was necessary to cap the complexity used by Tig to 4309 sec. We plan to release all of this code under Microsoft style.

Evaluation

Measuring a system as ambitious as ours proved difficult. In this light, we worked hard to arrive at a suitable evaluation method. Our over-all performance analysis seeks to prove three hypotheses:

a) That the Nintendo Game boy of yesteryear actually exhibits better average power than today's hardware;

b) That 64 bit architectures no longer affect RAM space; and finally

c) That the Turing machine no longer toggles a methodology's API.

We are grateful for pipelined checksums; without them, we could not optimize for complexity simultaneously with seek time. The reason for this is that studies have shown that average response time is roughly 97% higher than we might expect [28]. Our evaluation strives to make these points clear (Figure 2).

Hardware and Software Configuration

Many hardware modifications were necessary to measure our solution. Italian theorists executed a deployment on our system to disprove the complexity of artificial intelligence. We added more hard disk space to Intel's symbiotic overlay network. Continuing with this rationale, we re-moved 3 GB/s of Internet access from our system. We doubled the hard disk speed of our sensor-net test bed. This configuration step was time-consuming but worth it in the end. Along these same lines, we tripled the NV-RAM space of our XBox network to investigate technology. Lastly, we added more 100MHz Pentium Centrinos to our human test subjects. We ran Tig on commodity operating systems, such as DOS and Minix Version 9c, Service Pack 7. We added support for Tig as a kernel patch [29-32]. We implemented our DHCP server in enhanced Python, augmented with opportunistically randomly saturated extensions. We made all of our software is available under an Old Plan 9 License license (Figure 3).

Experiments and Results

Given these trivial configurations, we achieved non-trivial results. Seizing upon this ideal con-figuration, we ran four novel experiments:

a) We deployed 99 LISP machines across the planetary- scale network, and tested our Markov models accordingly;

b) We ran Web services on 01 nodes spread throughout the underwater network, and compared them against virtual machines running locally;

c) We ran 68 trials with a simulated E-mail workload, and compared results to our earlier deployment;

d) We ran Markov models on 85 nodes spread throughout the underwater network, and compared them against vacuum tubes running locally.

All of these experiments completed without resource starvation or noticeable performance bottlenecks. We first explain the second half of our experiments. Note that (Figure 3) shows the expected and not median random expected bandwidth. We omit these algorithms for anonymity. Error bars have been elided, since most of our data points fell outside of 82 standard deviations from observed means. Further, note that DHTs have more jagged popularity of architecture curves than do auto generated virtual machines (Figure 4). Shown in (Figure 3), experiments (3) and (4) enumerated above call attention to our application’s hit ratio. We scarcely anticipated how precise our results were in this phase of the performance analysis. Such a hypothesis is often a natural intent but is derived from known results. Second, error bars have been elided, since most of our data points fell outside of 56 standard deviations from observed means. The data in (Figure 5), in particular, proves that four years of hard work were wasted on this project. Lastly, we discuss experiments (3) and (4) enumerated above. The key to (Figure 4) is closing the feedback loop; (Figure 2) shows how Tig's energy does not converge otherwise. Note the heavy tail on the CDF in (Figure 4), exhibiting weak-ened complexity. Error bars have been elided, since most of our data points fell outside of 72 standard deviations from observed means (Figure 5).

Conclusion

Tig will overcome many of the obstacles faced by today’s cyber informaticians. Similarly, we concentrated our efforts on demonstrating that RPCs can be made encrypted, peer-to-peer, and trainable. We described a methodology for de-centralized communication (Tig), which we used to confirm that Lamport clocks can be made linear-time, homogeneous, and interposable. We see no reason not to use Tig for locating metamorphic communication.

For more articles in Open Access Journal of Environmental Sciences & Natural Resources please click on: https://juniperpublishers.com/ijesnr/index.php

[gethealthy18-blog]

How to Get Enough Calcium Without Dairy

New Post has been published on http://healingawerness.com/news/how-to-get-enough-calcium-without-dairy/

How to Get Enough Calcium Without Dairy

Table of Contents[Hide][Show]

When our third child started to eat solid foods, we found out that he had a pretty severe dairy allergy. It started with bad gas and mucousy stools, then progressed to skin reactions and even worse digestive problems.

Food allergies are common in babies born early, and my son was five weeks premature (that whole story and my other birth stories here).

In response to this new information, I cut dairy out of my diet because I was still breastfeeding my son. Even though I was only eating raw and organic forms of dairy before, I found that I felt much better, I lost weight more quickly, and had smoother skin in response to the dietary change. While I was sad to give up my favorite raw cheeses, was glad to know that my body didn’t tolerate dairy well, either.

While the baby and I felt better without cow’s milk products, there was a new thing to be concerned about: How will we get enough calcium without dairy?

How Much Calcium Do We Need?

Calcium is the most abundant mineral in the human body. As we know, it is vital for strong bones and teeth, and it’s also important for muscle development, healthy blood pressure, and skin health.

The recommended daily intake is 1,000 mg of calcium for men and women, and those calcium requirements rise to about 1,200 mg for older adults. Tracking your intake can be tricky because calcium isn’t always properly absorbed — meaning we generally might need to consume more than we think.

For reference, calcium from dairy products is about 30-35% bioavailable. Other calcium-rich foods that are more absorbable than dairy include fish with bones and cooked veggies like bok choy, kale, and broccoli.

Some foods are often suggested as a good dietary source of calcium but are not as absorbable. For example, spinach contains only around 5% of bioavailable calcium.

Middle-of-the-line options are edamame and soy milk (24% bioavailable), white beans (22%), and sesame seeds (21%).

Bottom line: When tracking your calcium intake, it’s important to consider how easily our bodies can absorb the nutrients in different food sources.

Vitamins That Help the Body Absorb Calcium

Another factor to consider in the bioavailability of calcium is the other vitamins you’re getting in your diet.

Vitamin D is required for the proper absorption of calcium, with one study showing that people who were deficient in vitamin D only absorbed 14% of the calcium from food, versus 58% absorption from those with adequate levels. Fortunately, many natural food sources of calcium (like fatty fish) are also good sources of vitamin D.

It’s also important to get enough magnesium, as it helps to convert vitamin D into its active form. Magnesium is also used in the creation of the hormone calcitonin. Calcitonin keeps calcium in the bones and not in the bloodstream, lowering the likelihood of osteoporosis, some forms of arthritis, heart attack, and kidney stones.

Keep in mind though that magnesium must be in the proper ratio to be used correctly. It’s important to be mindful of getting calcium from synthetic sources that are low in magnesium.

Vitamin K is also important for calcium synthesis, as it helps keep calcium in bones and out of arteries and muscles. Great sources include dark leafy greens, grass-fed butter, chicken livers and natto (a form of fermented soybeans).

Aside from getting enough of these nutrients, you may also want to consider limiting the amount of grains you eat. Grains are high in phytic acid, which can inhibit proper calcium uptake.

The bottom line: Calcium is ineffective without magnesium, vitamin K, and vitamin D. Eating too many grains can make calcium absorption more difficult as well.

Why Calcium Supplements Are Not the Answer

Since it seems so complicated to get enough calcium without dairy every day, you might be tempted (like I was) to try calcium supplements. However, it seems like that’s not a great choice. (Here’s why.)

Calcium supplements ups your risk of ingesting too much calcium. This can lead to increased risk of kidney stones, heart disease, and more.

As Chris Kresser explains, supplemental intake of calcium can be problematic, but dietary intake of calcium is considered safe and healthy:

Beyond being ineffective for bone health, calcium supplements are associated with some pretty serious health risks. Studies on the relationship between calcium and cardiovascular disease (CVD) suggest that dietary intake of calcium protects against heart disease, but supplemental calcium may increase the risk. A large study of 24,000 men and women aged 35–64 years published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in 2012 found that those who used calcium supplements had a 139% greater risk of heart attack during the 11-year study period, while intake of calcium from food did not increase the risk. A meta-analysis of studies involving more than 12,000 participants also published in BMJ found that calcium supplementation increases the risk of heart attack by 31%, stroke by 20% and death from all causes by 9%.

To be safe, calcium should be consumed from real food sources and not synthetic supplements or artificially fortified foods, like orange juice (where the synthetically added amount of calcium just settles to the bottom of the carton anyway).

Non-Dairy Sources of Calcium

While dairy is known to be a good source of calcium, there are many people who are lactose intolerant, allergic, or otherwise sensitive to dairy. In fact, it is estimated that 65% of the human population has a reduced ability to process dairy beyond infanthood.

Fortunately, there are lots of nutritious ways you can get calcium without dairy. Here are some of the best sources of calcium — and they’re all budget-friendly!

Bone Broth

Bone broth is a great source of calcium and many other minerals, and it’s so easy to make (but if you’re looking for a store-bought version, I recommend this one!) Broth made from healthy bones also contain amino acids that are great for other areas of your health, including digestion, skin, nervous system and joints.

Broth can be made from chicken, beef, lamb, bison, or even fish bones for just pennies a cup. Slow simmering the bones for long periods is best, as it allows the calcium and other minerals to dissolve into the water. As the Weston A Price Foundation puts it:

Science validates what our grandmothers knew. Rich homemade chicken broths help cure colds. Stock contains minerals in a form the body can absorb easily—not just calcium but also magnesium, phosphorus, silicon, sulphur and trace minerals. It contains the broken down material from cartilage and tendons–stuff like chondroitin sulphates and glucosamine, now sold as expensive supplements for arthritis and joint pain.

Fish With Bones

Fatty fish, especially those with the bones still intact, contain an impressive calcium content, and absorb easily. Canned fish like salmon and sardines are an easy and inexpensive way to get your fill, since the bones become soft and edible during the canning process. Just be sure to buy BPA-free tins and cans whenever possible!

I know, you might have just wrinkled your nose in disgust at the thought of eating whole sardines, but as Diane of Balanced Bites so perfectly put it:

Y’all need to put your big boy or girl pants on, get a tin of wild sardines, grab some sea salt and lemon or hot sauce, and DIG IN.

One six-ounce serving of canned wild salmon has over 110 milligrams of absorbable calcium and canned sardines rank about the same (or higher). Since these foods are also a good source of vitamin D, they enhance digestion of the calcium and make it more usable.

(If you’re curious, I get my salmon and other seafood from Vital Choice, and sardines from Thrive Market (the Thrive Market brand).

Dark, Leafy Greens

Dark leafy greens are another great dietary source of calcium and are probably your best bet if you’re vegan. However, not all leafy greens are created equal. Collard greens, turnip greens, bok choy, kale, and broccoli all ranked high as absorbable sources of calcium.

Dark leafy greens are also great sources of folate, vitamins A, C, E and K, and B-vitamins. Jonathan Bailor, author of The Calorie Myth, is fond of saying that if you make no other changes in your diet, you will see positive results just from adding a few extra servings of green leafy vegetables a day.

If you’re looking for dietary program to follow that doubles (or triples?) your veggie intake, I highly recommend the Wahls Diet Protocol because of her emphasis on vegetables en masse.

Getting Calcium… Without Dairy

Whether you’re allergic to dairy or just trying to avoid it for your own personal health reasons, there are plenty of ways you can get enough calcium without dairy. Supplementing is not necessary! Just make an effort to eat plenty of calcium-rich foods like broth, fish with bones, veggies (especially the green leafy kind), and other healthy sources of fats, protein, and probiotics as part of a varied diet.

While the above suggestions worked great for my family and me, keep in mind that I’m not a doctor and can’t tell you what your individual needs are. Be sure to check in with a health professional to get your nutrient levels checked and to discuss the best calcium sources for you.

This article was medically reviewed by Dr. Lauren Jefferis, board certified in Internal Medicine and Pediatrics. As always, this is not personal medical advice and we recommend that you talk with your doctor or work with a doctor at SteadyMD.

Do you eat dairy? Do you try to get your calcium in other ways? Share below!

Sources:

Chesnut III, C. H., Silverman, S., Andriano, K., Genant, H., Gimona, A., Harris, S., … & Moniz, C. (2000). A randomized trial of nasal spray salmon calcitonin in postmenopausal women with established osteoporosis: the prevent recurrence of osteoporotic fractures study. The American Journal of Medicine, 109(4), 267-276.

Curhan, G. C., Willett, W. C., Rimm, E. B., & Stampfer, M. J. (1993). A prospective study of dietary calcium and other nutrients and the risk of symptomatic kidney stones. New England Journal of Medicine, 328(12), 833-838.

Hsu, D. J., Lee, C. W., Tsai, W. C., & Chien, Y. C. (2017). Essential and toxic metals in animal bone broths. Food & Nutrition Research, 61(1), 1347478.

Lansdown, A. B. (2002). Calcium: a potential central regulator in wound healing in the skin. Wound repair and regeneration, 10(5), 271-285.

Lönnerdal, B. O., Sandberg, A. S., Sandström, B., & Kunz, C. (1989). Inhibitory effects of phytic acid and other inositol phosphates on zinc and calcium absorption in suckling rats. The Journal of nutrition, 119(2), 211-214.

Lucas, A., Brooke, O. G., Cole, T. J., Morley, R., & Bamford, M. F. (1990). Food and drug reactions, wheezing, and eczema in preterm infants. Archives of disease in childhood, 65(4), 411-415.

Malde, M. K., Bügel, S., Kristensen, M., Malde, K., Graff, I. E., & Pedersen, J. I. (2010). Calcium from salmon and cod bone is well absorbed in young healthy men: a double-blinded randomised crossover design. Nutrition & metabolism, 7(1), 61.

on Diet, C., & National Research Council. (1989). Minerals. In Diet and Health: Implications for Reducing Chronic Disease Risk. National Academies Press (US).

Polonsky, T. S., McClelland, R. L., Jorgensen, N. W., Bild, D. E., Burke, G. L., Guerci, A. D., & Greenland, P. (2010). Coronary artery calcium score and risk classification for coronary heart disease prediction. Jama, 303(16), 1610-1616.

Siebecker, A. (2005). Traditional bone broth in modern health and disease. Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, (259-260), 74-82.

Titchenal, C. A., & Dobbs, J. (2007). A system to assess the quality of food sources of calcium. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 20(8), 717-724.

Wasserman, R. H. (2004). Vitamin D and the dual processes of intestinal calcium absorption. The Journal of nutrition, 134(11), 3137-3139

Source: https://wellnessmama.com/18369/calcium-without-dairy/

[theresawelchy]

ExFaKT: a framework for explaining facts over knowledge graphs and text

ExFaKT: a framework for explaining facts over knowledge graphs and text Gad-Elrab et al., WSDM’19

Last week we took a look at Graph Neural Networks for learning with structured representations. Another kind of graph of interest for learning and inference is the knowledge graph.

Knowledge Graphs (KGs) are large collections of factual triples of the form

(SPO) about people, companies, places etc.

Today’s paper choice focuses on the topical area of fact-checking : how do we know whether a candidate fact, which might for example be harvested from a news article or social media post, is likely to be true? For the first generation of knowledge graphs, fact checking was performed manually by human reviewers, but this clearly doesn’t scale to the volume of information published daily. Automated fact checking methods typically produce a numerical score (probability the fact is true), but these scores are hard to understand and justify without a corresponding explanation.

To better support KG curators in deciding the correctness of candidate facts, we propose a novel framework for finding semantically related evidence in Web sources and the underlying KG, and for computing human—comprehensible explanations for facts. We refer to our framework as ExFaKT (Explaining Facts over KGs and Text resources).

There could be multiple ways of producing evidence for a given fact. Intuitively we prefer a short concise explanation to a long convoluted one. This translates into explanations that use as few atoms and rules as possible. Furthermore, we prefer evidence from trusted sources to evidence over less trusted sources. In this setting, the sources available to us are the existing knowledge graph and external text resources. The assumption is that we have some kind of quality control over the addition of facts to the knowledge graph, and so we prefer explanations making heavy use of knowledge graph facts to those than rely mostly on external texts.

In addition to the facts in the knowledge base, we have at our disposal a collection of rules. These rules may have been automatically harvested from unstructured documents (see e.g. DeepDive), or they might be provided by human authors. In the evaluation 10 students are given a short 20 minute tutorial on how to write rules, and then asked to pick 5 predicates from a list of KG predicates and write at least one supporting rule and one refuting rule for each. It took 30 minutes for the students to produce 96 rules between them. More than half of the rules were strong (represent causality and generalise), and more than 80% were either strong or valid (valid rules capture a correlation but may be tied to specific cases). The remaining incorrect rules were filtered out by having the same participants judge each others rules using a voting scheme. The authors conclude that manual creation of rules is not a bottleneck, and could be informed by crowdsourcing at a fairly low cost.

A rule is specified using the implication form of Horn clauses:

. H is the head, which we can infer if all of the body clauses are true. For example,

citizenOf(X,Y)

mayorOf(X,Z), locatedIn(Z,Y)

E.g., if London is located in England, and Sadiq Khan is the mayor of London, then we can infer that Sadiq Khan is a citizen of England.

One technique we could try is to iterate from known facts and rules to a fixpoint. The challenge here is that we are including an external text corpus as part of the resources available to us. That text corpus could be, e.g. ‘the Web’. Finding every possible deducible fact across the entire web, and then checking to see if our candidate fact is among them isn’t going to be very efficient!

So what ExFaKT does instead is to work backwards from the candidate fact, recursively using query rewriting to break the query down into a set of simpler queries, until we arrive at body atoms. The recursion stops when either no rules can be found or all atoms are instantiated either by facts in the KG or by text.

For example, suppose we have a knowledge graph with three facts:

directed(lucas, star_wars) isDirector(nolan) directed(lucas, amer_graffiti)

And two rules:

influencedBy(X,Y) <- isDirector(X), directed(Y,Z), inspiredBy(X,Z) inspiredBy(X,Y) <- liked(X,Y), isArtist(X)

For out text corpus we’ll assume all Wikipedia articles. The query we want to fact check is influencedBy(nolan, lucas).

Expanding the initial query we have three things to check: isDirector(nolan), directed(lucas,Z) and inspiredBy(nolan, Z). We know that isDirector(nolan) directly from the fact base. Now we can ground the second directed(lucas, Z) from the fact base, leading us to two candidate explanations:

isDirector(nolan), directed(lucas, star_wars), inspiredBy(nolan, star_wars)

isDirector(nolan), directed(lucas, amer_graffiti), inspiredBy(nolan, amer_graffiti)

Starting with the first candidate, inspired(nolan, star_wars) is found in wikipedia, so we add this explanation to the output set. Since text is a noisy resource, we can also break down inspiredBy(nolan, star_wars) into the two subgoals liked(nolan, star_wars), isArtist(nolan). If these two atoms are also spotted in the text corpus, we can add this as an additional explanation to the output set.

Using bind to refer to the operation of retrieving answers to a given query from underlying data sources, the overall ExFaKT algorithm looks like this:

We keep track of the depth of recursion to limit the total number of rewritings and ensure termination. The algorithm can be stopped whenever it has uncovered satisfactory explanations, but we want to ensure that we find good explanations meeting the criteria we laid out earlier. Thus when picking a promising explanation to explore (line 4), we favour shorter explanations and explanations with fewer rewritings. When picking an atom to search for (line 9), atoms without variables are preferred, then those with some constants, and atoms with only variables are sent to the back of the queue. Atoms with KG substitutions are preferred to those that can only be backed up by text.

Key results from the evaluation shows that:

Combining both KG and textual resources results in superior predicate recall than relying solely on just the KG or just the text corpus.

When the evidence produced by ExFaKT is presented to a human, they are able to judge the truthfulness of a fact candidate in 27 seconds on average. Using just standard web searches it took them on average 51 seconds.

This illustrates the benefits of using our method for increasing the productivity and accuracy of human fact-checkers.

One of the things I wondered when working through the paper is that the system seems very vulnerable to confirmation bias. I.e., it deliberately goes looking for confirming facts, and declares the candidate true if it finds them. But maybe there is an overwhelming body of evidence to the contrary, which the system is going to ignore? The answer to this puzzle is found in section 4.5, where the authors evaluate the use of ExFaKT in automated fact checking. For each candidate fact ExFaKT is used to generate two sets of supporting explanations: one set confirming the fact, and one set refuting it. By scoring the evidence presented (roughly, the trust level of the sources used, over the depth of the explanation) it’s possible to come to a judgement as to which scenario is the more likely.

The conducted experiments demonstrate the usefulness of our method for supporting human curators in making accurate decisions about the truthfulness of facts as well as the potential of our explanations for improving automated fact-checking systems.

the morning paper published first on the morning paper

[nerdcorp]

News: 1/28/17

NXT TakeOver Updates - The NXT TakeOver: Dallas Pre-Show panel tonight will feature Nigel McGuinness, Charly Caruso, and Corey Graves. The pre-show will air on the WWE Network tonight at 7PM EST. Additionally, extra tickets were released today after production on the TakeOver set concluded. At the normal rate, the seats were probably seats with some visibility obstructed a bit, but usually tend to sell out fast regardless of that.

CONOR MCGREGOR/WWE UPDATE - The Irish Sun reports that Conor McGregor has reportedly turned down a huge offer from WWE to appear at Wrestlemania. According to the website, WWE contacted McGregor’s camp and told him to name his price. McGregor is currently on an extended hiatus with partner Dee Devlin, as he will be a father later this year.A source said: “WWE has made no secret of its desire to do something with Conor McGregor and there were talks between the two parties about this year. Because he’s taking time off from the UFC, there was a talk about doing something at this year’s Wrestlemania in April, but it wasn’t to be despite a hefty offer.”Sports stars like Muhammad Ali, Floyd Mayweather, Shaquille O’Neal, Mike Tyson and Ronda Rousey have all appeared at the even in the past. Mayweather reportedly earned over $17 million for a match against The Big Show in 2008.

After McGregor became a dual champion in November, his agent Audie Attar said: “I think it’s all about business, man. If WWE is going to come with an offer, we’re willing to entertain it.”

Meanwhile, Triple H praised McGregor and expressed an interest in him showing up. He said: “He could come over, he’s got it all, man. He’s got the personality, the skills, the talk. He’s an entertainer.”

McGregor, however, has taken shots at WWE in the past. While praising Vince McMahon, he also called John Cena a “big fat, 40-year-old failed Mr Olympia mother******.”

SUNNY UPDATE - PWInsider has the latest update on the current issues for WWE Hall of Famer Tammy Sytch. Court records indicate that she was fined $1,496.45 in Northhampton County Court in Easton, Pennsylvania due to her pleading guilty to driving without a license, driving an unregistered vehicle, operating a vehicle without required financial responsibility (meaning no insurance), displaying plate card in improper vehicle (which means that license plates were placed on a car they didn’t belong to), operating a vehicle without valid inspection, and driving without Evidence of an Emission Inspection (a state law requirement). Sytch’s fine was an agreement with the court after her most severe charge, receiving stolen property and a charge of fraudulent use or removal of registered licensed plates were withdrawn by prosecutors. Sytch reportedly appeared to receive no jail time since her most severe charges were dropped. Additionally, she was already incarcerated in Carbon County, Pennsylvania, which is about 45 minutes away from Easton.This issue stems from her arrest while she was on probation in Carbon County where she plead guilty to three DUIs in 2015 after she completed a rehab program. As a result, she was sentenced to 97 days in jail, but she received credit for 95 days in rehab and only stayed in jail for two days. After her release, the former WWE talent was warned that if she got into trouble again during her probation, there would be severe consequences.

In September 2016, she was arrested several times. She’s currently awaiting her hearing in Carbon County on February 17 regarding her probation and parole being revoked. She could face up to five years imprisonment and other penalties.

[emmajenna]

Online Relationship Ends in Divorce

When you begin dating it’s a whole new world with several prospects on the horizon. Online dating has made it easier to find love in an already difficult dating scene. Many websites will match you to people with similar interests in your area. You can get to know each other and begin an intimate relationship without ever meeting in person. Many relationships that begin online end in marriage. Things are blissful for some time and then here comes the dreaded divorce talk and threats of finding the best divorce lawyer. When the dreaded prospect of divorce arises contact a Salt Lake City divorce attorney to discuss options. There are several reasons why a relationship that begins online has a higher chance of ending in divorce.

CHEMISTRY

When the relationship is based solely online and through a screen, the chemistry feels electric. Then it comes time to meet face to face and the chemistry just doesn’t translate. You can’t stand each other and simply just don’t get along. There is absolutely no attraction but yet you’re stuck here with nowhere else to go. Even though many dating sites will match you with someone in your area some couples have to travel different states or countries to be with each other. In theory, you think you are both meant to be. You have similar backgrounds and morals. It’s a perfect match well that’s what the dating site says anyways.

Chemistry can also fade over time as with any relationship. It can be great without any issues, you even make it to the altar without any major relationship problems. You had talked and fantasized about this from the moment you started dating and your time has arrived; wedded bliss. The expectations are high and aren’t being met. One partner feels let down and disappointed leading to resentment. The other partner begins to feel as if they have let you down. You both come to the conclusion that divorce may be the only way out.

RELOCATION ISSUES

When couples live in different areas and aren’t close together this puts a major strain on the relationship. They have to move figuratively and literally to resolve the issue. One partner will need to uproot their entire life to make things work. This is a big step that requires many changes and a lot of compromises. One spouse will need to give up their home, job, friends, and family for love. The first step is finding a new job which isn’t always easy so in the meantime, you have to depend on your partner for financial assistance or eat up any savings you have. This starts to build resentment if the communication isn’t there yet. When things don’t end up working out and it gets too difficult, arguments begin leading towards a downward spiral ending in separation and divorce. Couples should sit down and come up with a realistic plan of action and have contingency options if things go awry.

DO FATHERS RECEIVE FAIR TREATMENT IN CHILD CUSTODY CASES?

Child Custody Cases: There are few bonds more precious than a parent and their child. In many instances, fathers take a very active role as their child’s development. But in far too many cases, the rights of fathers are constantly under attack. For example, Utah’s adoption laws call for the consent of one parent. In the vast majority of those cases, fathers often find themselves in a powerless situation. The bias against fathers in Utah involving adoption is extremely blatant. State laws allow mothers to place their child up for adoption without consent of the father. In fact, the father does not have sign the papers. The state’s adoption law bias is so notorious, many mothers from other states travel to Utah just place their child for adoption.

THE RISING TREND OF CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE IN SALT LAKE CITY

Divorce can often get messy.  Child custody is one of the most complex issues in Utah family law. In addition to complying with legal obligations, fathers must also wrestle with emotional issues when it comes to the custody of their children. There are many questions that need to be answered. Who has access to the children when they are with the other parent? How much time will the child get to spend with each parent? The sad truth is many parents do not properly follow the child custody arrangements made by the court. The amount of custodial interference cases in has skyrocketed in recent years. In far too many cases, the rights of fathers are being ignored.  Here is how fathers can protect themselves.

Present the divorce decree signed by the judge to prove your legal parental obligations

Never file a petition with family court based on revenge or vengeance.

Make sure to document important evidence, including emails, phone conversations and text messages between you and your former spouse.

A recent study conducted by a respect law firm indicates, there is a clear bias against father–particularly in cases involving custodial interference.

64% of custodial interference cases against mothers are thrown out by courts

Custodial interference cases have tripled in the last decade.

The average time between filing for custodial interference cases is 232 days.

Free Consultation with Divorce Lawyer

When you need a divorce attorney, call Ascent Law for your Free Consultation (801) 676-5506. We will help you.

Ascent Law LLC8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite CWest Jordan, Utah 84088 United StatesTelephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

Child Support Modifications for Job Loss

Dealing with Divorce

Keep Social Media Out of Divorce

Taxes on Spousal Support

Prenup Lawyer in Salt Lake City

Divorce Attorney Orem UT

from Michael Anderson http://www.ascentlawfirm.com/online-relationship-ends-in-divorce/

from Divorce Attorney Salt Lake City http://ift.tt/2EI3jVB

[usatrendingsports]

WWE Raw results, recap: Massive title change, Paige returns with her own faction

One night after a loaded Survivor Series card was nearly spoiled by a curious booking decision to close the main event, WWE made sure to send the fans home happy to end Raw. Monday's three-hour episode, already filled with an equal mix of highs and lows, ended with a bang thanks to an exciting intercontinental championship match between The Miz and Roman Reigns, which felt like it wouldn't have been out of place on Sunday's card.  

WWE also did well to repair some of the bad feelings lingering from Sunday's decision to have Triple H sabotage his own teammate by accelerating the storyline. Mixing that with yet another surprising revel on Monday -- Paige's return and the debut of a new women's faction -- and you have an episode of Raw worth talking about as the early seeds continue to get planted on the build toward WrestleMania 34.

AND NEW ... intercontinental champion

Joined by his Shield brethren, Reigns was a guest on Miz TV earlier in the night. The Miz berated him, calling The Shield ungrateful and demanding credit for their reunion (along with residual checks from their merchandise). The crowd responded by giving him a "Miz is awesome" chant. The segment ended with Reigns challenging Miz for his intercontinental title and The Shield taking out Bo Dallas and Curtis Axel as The Miz sheepishly escaped.  After the Miz's attempt to beg Raw general manager Kurt Angle to cancel the match were unsuccessful, the two met in the main event.

A long series of dramatic near falls ensued as Miz countered a pair of Superman punches into kicks to the head for two. Reigns then nearly ended matters when he caught Miz off the top rope with a Superman punch. Out came The Bar to provide a distraction, allowing Miz to hit his Skull-Crushing Finale. But Reigns kicked out again, triggering a run-in from Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose to deal with Sheamus and Cesaro. Reigns then hit a spear to end the match and complete the career grand slam by winning his first intercontinental title.  

Great piece of booking by WWE. Not only did the surprise finish put an exciting bow on the episode, a Reigns-Miz feud has the potential to be fire. This match produced pay-per-view level feels and intertwined nicely with the overarching program against The Miz and The Bar that has been in place since The Shield's reunion.

Kane attacks Braun Strowman ... again 

Raw opened with commissioner Stephanie McMahon bragging about the red brand's victory at Survivor Series and ensuring Angle's job security. Out came Triple H to celebrate but he was instantly interrupted by Angle, who got in his face. "This is not Kurt Angle the general manager talking to you, this is the Olympic gold medalist and WWE Hall of Famer telling you that if you ever attack me from behind as you did last night, you can take this job and shove it because I'm coming for you," Angle said. McMahon warned Angle to watch his words in the face of the WWE's COO and Jason Jordan came out to defend his father, anxiously pitching for a match against Triple H. Jordan called him a coward, which forced Triple H to remove his coat. But after McMahon warned that her husband isn't afraid of anyone in the company, out came Strowman for an intense staredown. Triple H ultimately backed away and an angry Steph booked a Strowman-Jordan match for later.

Citing his knee injury that still isn't 100 percent, Jordan pleaded unsuccessfully backstage to have Angle call off the match. Jordan later approached Matt Hardy in the locker room and was discouraged by the advice he received on how to face "The Mountain Among Men." Once the match started, an ill-advised slap to the face was all the offense Jordan would mount as he tweaked his knee while Strowman threw him around the ring. 

But just as Strowman appeared to go for the finish, Kane emerged from the crowd to cut out his legs and beat him down with a chair. The finishing shot was a chair to the throat outside the ring, which left Strowman, who later refused medical attention, barely able to breathe.   

It's 2017 and Kane won't stop getting in the way of good storylines. After a two-hour focus on Jordan, seeing another gratuitous swerve involving Kane was sure to test the patience of any fan. Even if WWE gets the storyline right in the long term, using Kane's attack as a means to realign him with Triple H and the Authority, the feeling of being trolled yet again by "The Big Red Machine" is hard to shake.

Paige makes surprise return ... with some friends

Raw women's champion Alexa Bliss entered the ring to make excuses and complain about her frustrating loss to Charlotte Flair at Survivor Series. Out came Mickie James, Bayley, Sasha Banks and Alicia Fox in succession to plead their case for a title shot. Angle followed next and predictably booked a fatal 4-way match for a shot at Bliss' title.  

It didn't take long after the start of the match for Paige to emerge on the ramp, making her first appearance on WWE television since July 2016. "Did you miss me?" she asked. "I'm back … but I didn't come alone." NXT wrestlers Mandy Rose and Sonya Deville emerged from the crowd to take out Banks and Bayley in the ring with their finishers. Paige followed with a kick to the head on Banks and her Rampaige finisher on Bayley as a scared Fox ran to the locker room.  

After the new faction raised their arms and celebrated in the ring, their backstage interview was crashed by Bliss, who applauded them for giving Banks and Bayley "exactly what they deserved." Paige got into Bliss' face for a staredown before viciously attacking her as all three contributed to the beating.  

Talk about a shot in the arm for the division. While the union of Paige and a pair of debuting talents (who hadn't even been used in the NXT title picture) might not seem like a natural one, the intensity they showed in delivering their attacks brought something fresh to Raw that has been lacking. Paige can handle herself on the microphone and provided the moment with the arrogance and severity it needed. Rose and Deville were just as impressive in successfully translating the gritty and more realistic NXT style to the main roster. Here's to hoping we see more of that. Paige's return also couldn't have come at a better time, moments after Raw appeared to be going back to the well for another stale multi-women match to determine the next title contender.

What else happened on Raw? 

Samoa Joe def. Finn Balor via submission: Good intensity in this two-segment match. The spots weren't bad, either, including a textbook Tope Con Hilo from Balor and a stiff suicide dive from Joe that crushed Balor into the barrier wall. But it was Joe who received the strong booking in the end when he put Balor to sleep with the Coquina Clutch.  

Asuka def. Dana Brooke via pinfall: WWE continues to do right on the main roster building of Asuka, one night after she was the sole survivor for Team Raw at Survivor Series. Brooke did plenty of selling in this glorified squash match. After Brooke taunted Asuka and slapped her in the face, the former NXT champion answered with a flurry of stiff strikes and two kicks to the head for the 1-2-3.  

Dean Ambrose def. Sheamus via pinfall: Decent action in this otherwise pedestrian match created to reignite the feud between The Shield and The Bar. Sheamus hit the spot of the match with a rolling senton off the top rope which could only get two. In the end, Rollins ran through the ring to hit a suicide dive on Cesaro outside. The distraction allowed Ambrose to hit his Dirty Deeds on Sheamus to end it. 

Akira Tozawa, Cedric Alexander, Mustafa Ali & Rich Swann def. Drew Gulak, Tony Nese, Ariya Daivari & Noam Dar via pinfall: This eight-man cruiserweight tag team match came to be as a predictable spinoff to a promo by Enzo Amore and his heel faction, the Zo Train. Both the match and the stale dialogue between faces and heels beforehand felt like a low moment for the division. It's just not working. Ali hit a reverse 450 splash on Dar for the finish.  

Elias brawls with Matt Hardy: One night after Elias defeated Hardy handily on the Survivor Series kickoff show, he played a song on guitar taunting him in the lyrics. Out came Hardy in street clothes and nursing a left arm injury. Elias instantly attacked and they brawled until Hardy got the upper hand and Elias retreated to boos.  

require.config({"baseUrl":"http://ift.tt/2B0Ti4w","urlArgs":"","config":{"version":{"fly/components/accordion":"1.0","fly/components/alert":"1.0","fly/components/base":"1.0","fly/components/carousel":"1.0","fly/components/dropdown":"1.0","fly/components/fixate":"1.0","fly/components/form-validate":"1.0","fly/components/image-gallery":"1.0","fly/components/iframe-messenger":"1.0","fly/components/load-more":"1.0","fly/components/load-more-article":"1.0","fly/components/load-more-scroll":"1.0","fly/components/loading":"1.0","fly/components/marketing-slider":"1.0","fly/components/modal":"1.0","fly/components/modal-iframe":"1.0","fly/components/network-bar":"1.0","fly/components/poll":"1.0","fly/components/search-player":"1.0","fly/components/social-button":"1.0","fly/components/social-counts":"1.0","fly/components/social-links":"1.0","fly/components/tabs":"1.0","fly/components/video":"1.0","fly/libs/easy-xdm":"2.4.17.1","fly/libs/jquery.cookie":"1.2","fly/libs/jquery.throttle-debounce":"1.1","fly/libs/jquery.widget":"1.9.2","fly/libs/omniture.s-code":"1.0","fly/utils/jquery-mobile-init":"1.0","fly/libs/jquery.mobile":"1.3.2","fly/libs/backbone":"1.0.0","fly/libs/underscore":"1.5.1","fly/libs/jquery.easing":"1.3","fly/managers/ad":"2.0","fly/managers/components":"1.0","fly/managers/cookie":"1.0","fly/managers/debug":"1.0","fly/managers/geo":"1.0","fly/managers/gpt":"4.2","fly/managers/history":"2.0","fly/managers/madison":"1.0","fly/managers/social-authentication":"1.0","fly/managers/tealium":"1.0","fly/utils/data-prefix":"1.0","fly/utils/data-selector":"1.0","fly/utils/function-natives":"1.0","fly/utils/guid":"1.0","fly/utils/log":"1.0","fly/utils/object-helper":"1.0","fly/utils/string-helper":"1.0","fly/utils/string-vars":"1.0","fly/utils/url-helper":"1.0","libs/jshashtable":"2.1","libs/select2":"3.5.1","libs/jsonp":"2.4.0","libs/jquery/mobile":"1.4.5","libs/modernizr.custom":"2.6.2","libs/velocity":"1.2.2","libs/dataTables":"1.10.6","libs/dataTables.fixedColumns":"3.0.4","libs/dataTables.fixedHeader":"2.1.2","libs/dateformat":"1.0.3","libs/waypoints/infinite":"3.1.1","libs/waypoints/inview":"3.1.1","libs/waypoints/jquery.waypoints":"3.1.1","libs/waypoints/sticky":"3.1.1","libs/jquery/dotdotdot":"1.6.1","libs/jquery/flexslider":"2.1","libs/jquery/lazyload":"1.9.3","libs/jquery/maskedinput":"1.3.1","libs/jquery/marquee":"1.3.1","libs/jquery/numberformatter":"1.2.3","libs/jquery/placeholder":"0.2.4","libs/jquery/scrollbar":"0.1.6","libs/jquery/tablesorter":"2.0.5","libs/jquery/touchswipe":"1.6.18","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.core":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.draggable":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.mouse":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.position":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.slider":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.sortable":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.touch-punch":"0.2.3","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.autocomplete":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.accordion":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.tabs":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.menu":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.dialog":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.resizable":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.button":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.tooltip":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.effects":"1.11.4","libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.datepicker":"1.11.4"}},"shim":{"liveconnection/managers/connection":{"deps":["liveconnection/libs/sockjs-0.3.4"]},"liveconnection/libs/sockjs-0.3.4":{"exports":"SockJS"},"libs/setValueFromArray":{"exports":"set"},"libs/getValueFromArray":{"exports":"get"},"fly/libs/jquery.mobile-1.3.2":["version!fly/utils/jquery-mobile-init"],"libs/backbone.marionette":{"deps":["jquery","version!fly/libs/underscore","version!fly/libs/backbone"],"exports":"Marionette"},"fly/libs/underscore-1.5.1":{"exports":"_"},"fly/libs/backbone-1.0.0":{"deps":["version!fly/libs/underscore","jquery"],"exports":"Backbone"},"libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.tabs-1.11.4":["jquery","version!libs/jquery/ui/jquery.ui.core","version!fly/libs/jquery.widget"],"libs/jquery/flexslider-2.1":["jquery"],"libs/dataTables.fixedColumns-3.0.4":["jquery","version!libs/dataTables"],"libs/dataTables.fixedHeader-2.1.2":["jquery","version!libs/dataTables"]},"map":{"*":{"facebook":"http://ift.tt/1sGOfhN","facebook-debug":"http://ift.tt/2A7Cd7X","google":"http://ift.tt/xnjN8S","google-signin":"http://ift.tt/1xN9CxI","google-csa":"http://ift.tt/2hFaogq","google-javascript-api":"http://ift.tt/JuZcy0","google-client-api":"http://ift.tt/2fza0iJ","gpt":"http://ift.tt/1KuRZgO","recaptcha":"http://ift.tt/1bYl0uG","twitter":"https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js","mpx":"libs/tpPdk","tealium":"//tags.tiqcdn.com/utag/cbsi/cbssportssite/prod/utag.js","taboola":"http://ift.tt/2A6E3G4","sharethrough":"http://ift.tt/2hESPgt","newsroom":"http://ift.tt/2A86yDp","disqus":"//cbs-sports-prod.disqus.com/embed.js","disqus-commentcount":"//cbs-sports-prod.disqus.com/count.js"}}});

from Usa Trending Sports – NFL | NCAA | NBA | MLB | NASCAR | UFC | WWE http://ift.tt/2jcmxsT

[fromtheringapron]

WWF Survivor Series 1997

Date: November 9, 1997

Location: Molson Centre in Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Attendance: 20,593

Commentary: Jim Ross & Jerry Lawler

Results:

1. Survivor Series Elimination Match: The New Age Outlaws (Road Dogg & Billy Gunn) and The Godwinns (Henry Godwinn & Phineas Godwinn) defeated The Headbangers (Mosh & Thrasher) and The New Blackjacks (Bradshaw & Barry Windham). The New Age Outlaws were the survivors. 

2. Survivor Series Elimination Match: The Truth Commission (The Jackyl, Sniper, Recon, and The Interrogator) defeated The Disciples of the Apocalypse (Crush, Chainz, Skull, 8-Ball). The Interrogator was the sole survivor.

3. Survivor Series Elimination Match: Team Canada (The British Bulldog, Jim Neidhart, Phil Lafon, and Doug Furnas) defeated Team USA (Vader, Marc Mero, Goldust, and Steve Blackman) w/Sable. The British Bulldog was the sole survivor. 

4. Kane w/Paul Bearer defeated Mankind.

5. Survivor Series Elimination Match: Ken Shamrock, Ahmed Johnson, and The Legion of Doom (Hawk & Animal) defeated The Nation of Domination (Farooq, The Rock, D’Lo Brown, and Kama Mustafa). Ken Shamrock was the sole survivor. 

6. WWF Intercontinental Championship Match: Steve Austin defeated Owen Hart (champion) w/Team Canada to win the title. 

7. WWF World Heavyweight Championship Match: Shawn Michaels defeated Bret Hart (champion) to win the title. 

Analysis

Since his first world title win in the fall of 1992, it’s become abundantly clear Bret Hart is always playing second fiddle to someone else. Just when it seems he’s finally clinched the top spot on the roster, it’s snatched away from him by the powers that be and given to the likes of Hulk Hogan, Lex Luger, Yokozuna, Shawn Michaels, Diesel, and even a middle aged Bob Backlund. Worse, beginning in the fall of 1996, he’s been threatened to be usurped by Steve Austin, who spits on Hart’s signature pink & black without any remorse. With all that in mind, it’s not surprising Hart has been vocalizing his concerns since the dawn of 1997, albeit to a mixed response. Fans in the Untied States are quick to denounce him as a whiner, while his native Canada continues to view him as a hero. This tension reaches its climax at the year’s Survivor Series, which not only serves as confirmation of Hart’s fears and suspicions but also as a narratively perfect ending to the New Generation era.

Right from the start, Survivor Series 1997 is dripping with a sense of foreboding. The cartoonish, family-friendly nature of the New Generation era is completely gone, as the energy in Montreal is marked with hostility and nervousness. The crowd is ruthless in their cheers and jeers. No doubt few of them could expect what will occur in the show’s main event, but it’s revelatory watching this show in hindsight and immediately feeling like something major will occur. The atmosphere is incomparable to any other show in WWF history, and it warrants a watch almost on that basis alone.

The energy in the crowd spills wonderfully into the main event which, in terms of the actual match, doesn’t get discussed that much. It’s obviously different from any previous Bret/Shawn encounter. However, it does set the template for every Attitude Era main event to come by featuring wild brawling, minimal stalling, a screwy finish, etc.⏤how many times will we see Steve Austin, The Rock, and Triple H have the exact same match in the years following this show? The legit heat between the two can be felt throughout, and it’s kinda surprising the match didn’t turn into a legit fight at some point.

The match’s finish needs no recap. The Montreal Screwjob is one of the most infamous moments in wrestling history. Its notoriety has extended beyond the annals of the WWF/E. One facet of it that doesn’t get stated enough, however, is that it marks the exact moment where storyline and backstage drama come together seamlessly. For as much as it’s remembered for its real-life implications, it also winds up serving as the definitive end point for Hart’s onscreen story. It’s the moment we as an audience see all of Hart’s claims of the WWF being one huge conspiracy against him, which had previously been scoffed at and disregarded, proven to be true. There will never be another moment in wrestling when the real and the scripted blend together this perfectly.

As the show draws to a close, suspicion immediately falls on Vince McMahon, whose position as owner of the WWF finally rears its ugly head. It’s a neat way to lead us into the Attitude Era, as unintended as it may be. There’s no better way to kick off an era known for its focus on realism than revealing the man behind the curtain. Survivor Series 1997 is known by some as the night Bret screwed Bret. However, as the show’s ending and the trajectory of the past five years reveals, working with someone like McMahon ensured Bret was screwed long before that.

My Random Notes 

I really need to write a book on how the New Generation era is simply the saga of Bret Hart. For as much as the era is always criticized for its barrage of failed characters and slow business, it’s so much more palatable as one long-term tale of a working man’s struggle against the system until he finally snaps.

I love the addition of the French ring announcer. He makes everyone’s names sound so badass.

Man, I know he was huge asshole in real life during this time, but ‘90s prick heel HBK is seriously amazing. I love when some fan throws beer on him, shakes it off, and then proceeds to wipe his ass with the Canadian flag. His 92-95 heel character is sleazy but still rather cartoonish. This heel HBK seems like a real piece of shit.

Speaking of HBK, I have no idea how to assess his “performance” during the actual Screwjob. He jumps up in anger far too quickly for it to be super convincing but, I mean, I worry for his safety could’ve been in jeopardy had he just immediately started celebrating and rubbing it in Bret’s face because someone in Montreal that night surely would’ve murdered him.

The crowd bays for Billy Gunn’s blood. Seriously, the heat he gets in the opening match is unreal for one half of a tag team, including some unfortunate homophobic slurs (the Montreal crowd are just as much dicks as they are passionate).

Fun drinking game: Take a shot every time someone uses a sidewalk slam in the DOA/Truth Commission match.

Confession: I was terrified of Kane when he first he debuted. The red lighting and the mask freaked me out. I was only five years old, so cut me some slack.

I’m not sure what the hell they were intending with that USA vs. Canada match but it felt some bizarre recreation of the Canadian Stampede match from earlier in the year. Also, the F.U. painted on Goldust’s face is a shining example of Vince Russo’s complete lack of subtlety.

We all have our thoughts on the Screwjob, so here are mine: Bret’s stubbornness over dropping the title was petty and for as much as he tries to present himself as this humble, salt-of-the-earth folk hero, he’s got an ego the size of Calgary (read his book; you can feel the hubris). Sure, working (and possibly losing) to your worst, real-life enemy in your native Canada isn’t ideal, but the average working person in this world would’ve just put up with it. On the flip side, I’ll never be in the business of defending Vince McMahon for anything because I think he’s a huge piece of shit despite him being the reason I can even have this blog to begin with. I do believe his fears over the WWF title situation were valid, but surely there could’ve been a more productive way to solve the problem than outright lying to one of your most loyal employees yet giving him your world title belt mere months before leaving anyway. I mean, there was a ton of time before the Survivor Series to take the title off him, yes? The Montreal Screwjob is the perfect storm of both guys’ worst tendencies coming out at the exact same time. There’s always the argument of who was right in the situation, but I think both are to blame for bringing about the historic, business-changing shit show we know the Screwjob as today.

[andimallouttabubblegum]

It was a big four days as WWE descended on Brooklyn for the Biggest Party of the Summer. There were title changes and shocks aplenty, but what did we think of Summerslam weekend?

TakeOver: Brooklyn III happened on Saturday. So did Summerslam happened on Sunday night. Then we had Monday Night Raw, and Smackdown Live on Tuesday – followed by 205 Live. And then NXT had its TakeOver follow-up episode on Wednesday night. That adds up to 16 hours of wrestling from the Barclays Centre in Brooklyn, and I watched every last second of it. But supposing you actually have a social life or friends, what did you miss? I’m being joined by fellow Bubblegummers “Hollywood” Kev Hearne and “Too Smooth” Soham Deb to bring you the very best, and very worst, of the whole Summerslam weekend.

Best Match of the Weekend

James – Brock Lesnar v Roman Reigns v Samoa Joe v Braun Strowman

There was real star power in this match, and four huge guys just beat the snot out of each other. There’s not really much to add, it was a cracking match that never slowed down, everyone looked great, and we are finally getting the Braun Strowman v Brock Lesnar match we’ve been teased with for months.

Soham- Brock Lesnar v Roman Reigns v Samoa Joe v Braun Strowman

“These are huge men” said Michael Cole describing the participants in this match. For me this was the match of the night. People can say what they want about Brock Lesnar but whenever he fights it feels like a big deal. Braun and Roman came in to Summerslam following their fantastic Ambulance Match at Great Balls of Fire (still a ppv name)  and Joe finally found some momentum after a good showing against Brock. The match had some great spots and it goes to show that WWE can still book great matches if they really put their mind to it. 

Kev – Asuka v Ember Moon

This was one of the matches that I was looking forward to the most coming into the weekend, and it lived up to my expectations. They threw everything at each other, I was completely sold on how much each of them needed to win, and the crowd ate up everything they did. Asuka was as impressive as ever, but it was a star-making performance from Ember Moon, validated by the ovation she got from the Brooklyn crowd aftwewards. The result also took me by surprise.

Worst Match of the Weekend

Kev – Big Cass v The Big Show

Not a good match at all, and had no business being on the main card, when the likes of the Usos and the New Day have had a series of excellent matches and were relegated to the pre show. There was no point in Enzo being in the shark cage if there was never going to be any payoff. Cass has really been hurt by the breakup of his partnership with Enzo and I don’t think WWE know what they’re doing with him. Hopefully they will have a fresh plan for him when he returns from his injury.

James – Big Cass v The Big Show. 

I had very low expectations… and it was even worse. I don’t even know why Enzo was in a cage. If anything, The Big Show is the one who has been interfering in the matches, not Enzo. Show did his best, but this felt like a it would be something that belongs in the middle hour of Raw when they are just killing time. Working a body part is never going to be Big Cass’ strength, so it made his offense tediously dull. Then the match stops for a few minutes while Enzo greases himself up and slithers out of the cage… only to get kicked in the face straight away. 

Soham – Jason Jordan and The Hardy Boyz v Miz and the Miztourage 

 We saw the exact same match on the go-home episode of RAW. Having this match on the Summerslam card again was a bad decision for a number of reasons. The Hardy Boyz went from being one of the best things about Wrestlemania 33 to opening the Summerslam kick off show in under 5 months. The Miz has done a great job of making the Intercontinental Championship seem prestigious and having the Miz wrestle on the kick-off show in front of an almost empty arena does nothing for him or the championship. Jason Jordan being Kurt Angle’s illegitimate son has not gone down well with the WWE Universe with Jordan getting booed even louder with every week. The same match on RAW was comparatively better in my opinion with Jordan having some impressive spots.

Biggest Surprise of the Weekend

Soham –  Rusev losing in a squash match

Not only did our boy Ru-ru lose to Randy Orton at Summerslam but the match lasted less than a minute. Consider that Rusev lost to John Cena at Battleground after his comeback, it is no surprise that Rusev has reportedly asked for his WWE release. Even though the Wrestling Observer reports that the quick finish was to further the feud, I don’t understand why a 13 time world champion like Randy Orton needs rebuilding after losing to Jinder. He will not seem like a legitimate threat if he keeps losing to already established stars. Remember Rusev’s undefeated streak? Don’t think creative do.

Kev – Jinder Mahal beating Shinsuke Nakamura

Jinder Mahal’s championship run has not been great television, and it finally looked like Sunday would be the day it would come to an end. It may be that their rivalry has been extended, but Summerslam is the second biggest event on WWE’s calendar, and it seemed like the best time to put Smackdown’s biggest prize on Nakamura. Especially as Cena looks to be on Raw for the foreseeable future, the blue brand needs to create new legitimate stars. I shudder at the thought of another Orton title run.

James – Asuka beating Ember Moon

As ridiculous as it sounds that the dominant NXT Women’s Champion who has reined for over 500 days winning is a surprise, I just didn’t see it coming. Ember Moon was cheated out of victory at TakeOver: Orlando, had to sit out TakeOver: Chicago due to an injury Asuka caused, and when she hits the Eclipse, no-one has got up from it. Until Asuka did on Saturday night. Another remarkable victory for the Empress of Tomorrow. She even won with a broken freakin’ collarbone.

Best Performance of the Weekend

James – Braun Strowman.

Since Brock Lesnar’s return, he has lost matches. John Cena scraped a win in their first match back in 2012. Triple H beat him at Wrestlemania 29 (for some reasons I’m sure made sense at the time). The Undertaker made him pass out with his Hell’s Gate submission hold after a low blow. But no-one has manhandled Brock Lesnar like Braun Strowman did on Sunday night. Putting him through TWO announce table, then dumping a third on top of him, was truly remarkable. Add using his new signature weapon of a flying chair on Samoa Joe and Roman Reigns, and it is clear that the Monster Amongst Men is the most dangerous threat in the WWE. 

Soham – Brock Lesnar

I do not understand why Brock Lesnar’s name is never mentioned on any greatest pro-wrestlers lists. Whenever he shows up it feels like something big is about to go down. He brings “legitimacy” to the WWE. He is one of the best sellers in the roster right now. If he is invested in the story line and feels like he can draw money, he will make the opponent look like a star. Remember his Wrestlemania 33 match with Goldberg or his recent match with Samoa Joe? Braun Strowman had a great outing at Summerslam and I think Lesnar is a big reason why. Lesnar made Strowman look like an absolute monster (pun intended) and I think he deserves a lot of credit for that.

Kev – Braun Strowman

It was a real star-making performance for Braun Strowman on Sunday. He was mega over with the Summerslam crowd, and he dominated his fatal 4-way opponents. It is refreshing to see someone treated as an equal to Lesnar, and it has left me excited at the rumoured upcoming feud between the two.

Worst Performance of the Weekend Kev – Percy Watson

NXT has struck gold with its announcing duo of Mauro Ranallo and Nigel McGuinness. They are knowledgeable about the product, love wrestling, and their enthusiasm for the product shines through. It baffles me why they sit Percy Watson next to them. His commentary is so cringeworthy (see the ‘Alexander Black’ match) and he brought nothing to the table. And with the additions of Corey Graves and Jim Ross as guest announcers, he couldn’t get his voice heard.

James – Baron Corbin

 Ok, so technically Big Cass and The Big Show put on a worse match, but if you have bad matches with Shinsuke Nakamura AND John Cena on back-to-back shows, you are doing something fundamentally wrong. Corbin has had a rough week, and hopefully can get back on track soon, but he needed a big performance here and just didn’t do anything special.

Soham – Beach balls 

Are we not going to talk about beach balls? I think it is silly for someone to pay good money to come watch a wrestling show and then play with beach balls with complete disregard to the fact that the performers are trying to put on the best show possible. THANK YOU CESARO! Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap. Not only did Beachballmania try to spoil the RAW Tag Team Championship match but it came back the next day to haunt the main event on RAW.

Biggest Winner coming out of this week

Kev – Adam Cole, Bobby Fish & Kyle O’Reilly

With the loss of Bobby Roode to Smackdown, and more superstars expected to be called up, a gap has been left in NXT’s roster that needs filling. This was immediately addressed by the return of reDRagon, and the hotly anticipated debut of Adam Cole. They destroyed Sanity, AOP and the new NXT champ, and the landscape of the yellow brand has changed spectacularly, and I can’t wait to see what’s coming next.

James – Adam Cole

 While there were new champions crowned throughout the weekend, no-one made an impact as Earth-shattering as the former three time Ring of Honour Champion. Flanked by Bobby Fish and Kyle O’Reilly, Cole beat down new NXT Champion Drew McIntyre and announced himself straight away as a huge star. Without even having a match, he was the biggest winner of the whole week.

Soham – Sasha Banks

First,let me just say that I haven’t gotten around to watching NXT. Hence, Adam Cole isn’t the first choice for me, babay. Sasha Banks takes the biggest winner spot for me because originally she wasn’t supposed to be in the RAW WOMEN’S CHAMPIONSHIP match . With number one contender Bayley, getting injured in a match against Nia Jax on RAW, WWE didn’t have too many options to give the spot to someone else. Sasha put on a great match against Alexa Bliss and further showcased why she can be trusted to deliver with every given opportunity. Even though I was not expecting Sasha to win, it feels good to know that WWE haven’t lost faith in Sasha and we might actually get to see a potential heel turn against Bayley. 

Biggest Loser coming out of this week

Soham – Baron Corbin.

Opening the main card was John Cena vs Baron Corbin. Corbin was the Money In The Bank winner heading in to Summerslam, before unsuccessfully cashing it in on Smackdown last Tuesday. Honestly, I was not expecting Cena to lose this feud with his limited schedule and a possible move to Raw.  However, in about a week’s time,Corbin has lost the Money In The Bank briefcase and a feud with the top face in the company. According to Dave Meltzer, there is backstage heat on Corbin due to his aggressive twitter exchanges with other veterans in the business and this might be the reason why his “push” is being hampered. This is not the first time WWE have stopped a push suddenly, remember Mason Ryan? Now, Corbin finds himself at the very bottom of the barrel after two consecutive pay-per-view losses against Nakamura and Cena.

Kev – Baron Corbin

Just two weeks ago, Baron Corbin was potentially one of WWE’s next big stars, and with the Money in the Bank briefcase in his hand, it seemed it was not a question of if, but when he would become WWE champion. And in the space of just 6 days, he has lost to Jinder Mahal on Smackdown, lost in a disappointing match to Cena on Sunday, and with that has lost any momentum he has built up. The future doesn’t look too bright for Corbin coming out of Summerslam.

James – Rusev.

 I don’t get it. Jinder Mahal is our WWE Champion and Rusev is losing in 5 seconds to rebuild Randy Orton, the man won the Royal Rumble AND the WWE Championship at Wrestlemania, and really shouldn’t need rebuilding. Remember when they were in a tag team on Raw earlier this year? I feel like someone accidentally swapped their names around in the booking plans and then just fronted it out like it was the plan all along. Maybe this leads to him reuniting with Lana, or a face turn to allow him to display some of humour (check out his Twitter) but losing streaks NEVER work. 

Best Single Moment of the Weekend?

James – Johnny Gargano Is Still Haunted By Tommaso Ciampa

In the very first match of the weekend, “Johnny Wrestling” seemed to be on his way to a victory, when Andrade “Cien” Almas’ manager Zelina Vega threw a DIY shirt at Gargano, distracting him and allowing Almas to come back and pick up the win. It shows Gargano still has demons to deal with, and adds another level of sympathy to one of the purest babyfaces on the entire roster. Plus it makes Almas look like a Grade A dick, using any trick to win. The image of him staring at the blue shirt and backing slowly away was my highlight of the entire weekend for me.

Soham – Braun Strowman destroys Brock Lesnar

Braun Strowman put Brock Lesnar through two announce tables before flipping the third one on him while Lesnar was lying down in pain. Brock  might have been pinned before but has never been manhandled (or monsterhandled) in a similar way. This is why it makes Braun Strowman look like the most dangerous superstar in the current roster. WWE have been doing a stellar job of building up Strowman to be the next big thing and have not missed a single trick in the book.

Kev – Killian Dain puts Akam and Nikki Cross through a table

The NXT tag team title match was highly entertaining and better than most people were hoping for, but the moment that sticks out was Akam catching a flying Nikki Cross from the top turnbuckle, only for both of them to be charged through a table by Killian Dain. Mauro Ranallo was ecstatic on commentary, and it was a very impressive looking spot.

Worst Single Moment of the Weekend?

Kev – Rusev losing in 5 seconds

I think we were all expecting Randy Orton to pick up a win against Rusev on Sunday, but it was especially disappointing to see it over after just one move. Winning does nothing for Orton at this stage of his career, and this only served to further damage Rusev’s credibility. It’s incredibly frustrating as he has so much more to offer the Smackdown brand, and should never have been made to look like such a loser.

James – Jinder Mahal hits a terrible looking Khallas to beat Shinsuke Nakamura.

 Just everything about that sentence is wrong. Mahal using every distraction and shortcut to beat Orton and win the title for the first time was one thing, but using Nakamura to build JINDER MAHAL is ridiculous. The Singh brothers storm the ring, get beaten up, Mahal doesn’t quite grab Nakamura properly but hits an awkward looking version of his finisher anyway for an incredibly anticlimactic win. Cue shots of the crowd looking… well, slightly disappointed. We’ve seen it time and again, and any shock factor of Mahal winning has long worn off. To make matters worse, on Smackdown Live on Tuesday night, Nakamura destroyed the Singh brothers, showing that their feud will continue. Nakamura is coming close to just being another wrestler at this point. They almost botched AJ Styles before giving him the title, please don’t wait too long on Nakamura.

Also, why couldn’t WWE have built the Singh Brothers as a tag team and have them featured in a title feud? Imagine Cesaro and Sheamus beating them down every week, but they just won’t give up, until finally they win the titles at the one live event they have planned in India. Instead we have months of sub-par main events on Smackdown.

Soham – Jinder Mahal winning after Singh Brothers get involved.

Same picture as the last answer. Can you guess why? How many times have we seen the same finish with Jinder? If you have missed the last few weeks of WWE programming, this is how Jinder wins his matches: Singh Brothers distract opponent; Jinder uses this to his advantage and hits his finisher; Jinder wins. It is just lazy booking. I was expecting Nakamura to win this match considering that he pinned John Cena clean to become the number one contender. If WWE want to get Jinder over as a dominant heel, they have to come up with new ways for him to win and give him more freedom in his promos rather than having Jinder mumbling the same words every week.

Anything else to add?

James – Xavier Woods has really impressed me in the last two New Day v Usos matches. For a long time he was the third man of the group, unsurprising as both Big E and Kofi Kingston had lots of individual success before the Power of Positivity took hold. His role seemed to be running interference on the outside, or getting reactions from the crowd with Francesca. But while we may never actually get to see The New Day get serious (if they didn’t do it against The Wyatt Family, I don’t think they ever will), Xavier Woods has cut out the shenanigans and put in two quality performances over the last few months. 

Neville had a hilariously deadpan appearance on the NXT TakeOver pre-show panel, won back the Cruiserweight title at Summerslam, successfully defended it on 205 Live, and was then confronted by Enzo Amore. It’s an interesting time for the King of the Cruiserweights, and some well deserved time in the spotlight for a man who has totally reworked his gimmick, mannerisms, and wrestling style.

And finally, Bobby Roode is on Smackdown.

Glorious.

Soham

Booker T is a better wrestler than a commentator. During Roman Reigns’ entrance Booker T calls Roman ” the most hated superstar in 2016″. Firstly, its 2017 and has been for about 8 whole months and secondly calling Vince’s main guy “hated” isn’t going to go well backstage for Booker. Shucky Shucky Quack Quack. The RAW commentators also made sure that we know The Demon King is actually Finn Balor by repeatedly calling him Finn or Balor.

Kev – Kudos to Alexander Wolfe. I have been particularly impressed by his vast improvement over the last month or so. It seemed that with Eric Young as the leader of SAnitY, and Killian Dain as the powerhouse, Wolfe was simply there to make up the numbers. But he was the star of the tag team title match at Takeover, and is turning into the next Luke Harper.

I felt that it wasn’t a great weekend for the four horsewomen. Yes, Sasha Banks won the Raw womens championship, but it was clear from many boos from the Brooklyn Crowd that they were very much pro-Alexa Bliss. And with the fans continued (and harsh) negative reactions to Bayley, and the complete absence of Becky Lynch and Charlotte, I am concerned for the best four womens wrestlers this side of NXT.

And so, those are our thoughts on what went down last weekend in the world of WWE. What were your highlights? Let us know!

Until next time, stay gold, Ponyboy, stay gold. See you soonish.

Like what you’ve read? Then get following us on social media!

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/imallouttabubblegum/

Instagram:  https://www.instagram.com/andimallouttabubblegum/

Tumblr: https://andimallouttabubblegum.tumblr.com/

Path: https://path.com/5943403cd4578f261056b670

Plus we are finally on Twitter! https://twitter.com/BubblegumOutta

Summerslam Weekend Round-Up It was a big four days as WWE descended on Brooklyn for the Biggest Party of the Summer.