How to Brew Beer at Home

Many people don't realize how easy it really is to produce beer yourself, at your own home. For this reason, many people are missing out on a great opportunity to impress friends, family, and save lots of money. Brewing your own beer can cost as little as $6 a gallon! You can even bottle it yourself and sell it to make a profit.

One of the easiest ways to brew beer is by purchasing a kit that has all the tools you need. Most kits come with a brew keg and tap, as well as the ingredients (usually hops) and possibly containers. It really contains pretty much everything you need to get started! For that fact, it is definitely easy to get started and hard to stop. These kits usually go for around $20 to an upwards of a few hundred dollars. It really depends on how much beer you want to brew at one time, and how advanced you are.

By being able to brew your own beer, you will be able to create a delicious beer that tastes just how you like it, and in addition it's a great hobby to pass on and tell others about. Wouldn't it be nice to come home from work and have a nice ice cold beer, especially one that you have made yourself?

One of the key factors to take into consideration when brewing your own beer is that you need to make sure you follow the directions carefully and ensure that you are taking the correct measurements. Often times, if you measure the wrong quantity of ingredients just by a little bit, your beer can have a totally different taste than the last time you brewed.

If you are interested in taking up the hobby of brewing your own beer, than you should make sure to find a great source of information on how to do it. There are a lot of variables that come into play when you brew your own beer and you want to make sure that you have each one set correctly.

How to Brew Beer at Home   Home Made Wine Making - Some Things You Might Not Know   

How to Brew Beer at Home

Many people don't realize how easy it really is to produce beer yourself, at your own home. For this reason, many people are missing out on a great opportunity to impress friends, family, and save lots of money. Brewing your own beer can cost as little as $6 a gallon! You can even bottle it yourself and sell it to make a profit.

One of the easiest ways to brew beer is by purchasing a kit that has all the tools you need. Most kits come with a brew keg and tap, as well as the ingredients (usually hops) and possibly containers. It really contains pretty much everything you need to get started! For that fact, it is definitely easy to get started and hard to stop. These kits usually go for around $20 to an upwards of a few hundred dollars. It really depends on how much beer you want to brew at one time, and how advanced you are.

By being able to brew your own beer, you will be able to create a delicious beer that tastes just how you like it, and in addition it's a great hobby to pass on and tell others about. Wouldn't it be nice to come home from work and have a nice ice cold beer, especially one that you have made yourself?

One of the key factors to take into consideration when brewing your own beer is that you need to make sure you follow the directions carefully and ensure that you are taking the correct measurements. Often times, if you measure the wrong quantity of ingredients just by a little bit, your beer can have a totally different taste than the last time you brewed.

If you are interested in taking up the hobby of brewing your own beer, than you should make sure to find a great source of information on how to do it. There are a lot of variables that come into play when you brew your own beer and you want to make sure that you have each one set correctly.

Home Made Wine Making - Some Things You Might Not Know   

Employment Law in Dubai: The Law On Termination of Employment

Under Dubai Law, which is governed by United Arab Emirates (UAE) labour law, an employer must give an employee a minimum notice period of 30 days before termination of an employment contract. The United Aram Emirates law is inflexible in this respect which means that the law allows no room for negotiation, even when the employer is willing to consent to a shorter time period. Any shorter contractual notice period is unlikely to be enforceable by the employer.

Upon termination of employment, the United Arab Emirates labour law states that an employee must be reimbursed for all entitlements they have not been able to benefit from, such as unutilised leave. If the employee has worked for the company continually for at least a year, and does not participate in the Company's pension scheme, gratuity is owed to them on the termination of their employment. This is payable at a rate of 21 days a year for 1 - 5 years service, and 30 days for over 5 years. This is rightfully theirs as an 'end of service benefit.' UAE law specifically states that on termination of a contract, an employer must return an employee to their country of origin, should the employee fail to find alternative employment within a set time period.

It should be noted that there are no provisions under UAE for redundancy; hence they do not recognise 'redundancy compensation' per se. The UAE does however state, that an employer should provide pay of up to 3 months salary, where they have terminated the employment for a reason other than the employee's performance. Hence, in practice there is a provision for redundancy, just not in those words; yet this issue is still a very contentious one. UAE Labour Law could get complicated but all in all sides with the employees more often than not.

Children and Women Labor Law   Immigration Lawyers - What Are They Good for?   

New Labor Laws Don't Mean Much Until the Trial Lawyers Start Creating Case Law

The government often makes laws, and everyone assumes that that's how things will go. But often the laws the government makes are found to not be okay with the courts, and then the trial lawyers, and lawsuits begin. Eventually there's a lot of case law which changes the way in which companies do business, or how business is done. At no other place is this more significant than in the labor laws of our country.

Perhaps we should look at all the laws that are created in general first. Okay so, I live out in California, and we are always voting on new laws to take back the insanity of political correctness here and restore things to a realistic line of thinking in our governmental policies. "Fat Chance," say some and perhaps they are correct. California has overturned many of the laws in the court system that the voters have overwhelmingly voted for.

This same thing happens, when Congress creates new labor laws, for instance the way that employees are allowed to vote to determine if they wish to be unionized or rules and OSHA standards protecting workers, or laws protecting whistleblowers, and employees of large corporations. You see, new labor laws don't mean a whole lot until the trial lawyers start creating new case law, and once they do that mountain of bureaucracy builds on its own.

Then it gets into contracts, human resource procedures, labor negotiations, and it spreads across the country from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, it eventually goes international. This is why we have to be so careful when we make laws in Congress on labor issues. Just because we make a lot doesn't mean it will stick, and it may have incredibly adverse unintended consequences. In fact, many of the labor laws created to protect employees, actually end up hurting them, making their lives miserable, and force hundreds of thousands of people out of work.

Consider if you will issues with minimum wage, discrimination in employment, and bullying in the workplace. All of these laws have created unintended consequences, and that's before we even start talking about such things as sexual harassment, or PC rules of conduct within outside the organization. Please consider all this.

Children and Women Labor Law   Immigration Lawyers - What Are They Good for?   

The Personality Traits of a Sagittarius Baby

Your Sagittarius Baby...

November 22 - December 21 Young Sagittarians are happy, contented and playful. They can be impulsive and will be the kind of child who says 'hello' to everyone, and they will be despondent if others don't respond. Your child will be active and adventurous, rarely sitting still, but as a result may pick up more bumps and bruises than other children.

Although a Sagittarian child enjoys company, but when she or he is left alone will be content hugging a teddy or blanket. Sagittarians are totally honest and expect to be treated openly and honestly in return. You may find that your child asks endless questions and will demand answers from you.

Most Sagittarians enjoy learning but will take a dislike to any rules that they see as pointless. They are sociable characters who should be allowed to take any opportunity to socialise. Parents should not pressure a Sagittarian child or be possessive over her. A young Sagittarian child may hide her hurts and disappointments and should, therefore, be encouraged to show feelings.

Sagittarians are generous and parents will have to give guidance about money from an early age. These children are restless and freedom loving, but they may need to be taught that there are some social rules that must be obeyed for their own good.

The typical Sagittarian can be a bit clumsy and will pick up knocks and bruises from falling over and bumping into things. From a health viewpoint, the typical Sagittarius may suffer from asthma.

The Personality Traits of a Sagittarius Baby

Your Sagittarius Baby...

November 22 - December 21 Young Sagittarians are happy, contented and playful. They can be impulsive and will be the kind of child who says 'hello' to everyone, and they will be despondent if others don't respond. Your child will be active and adventurous, rarely sitting still, but as a result may pick up more bumps and bruises than other children.

Although a Sagittarian child enjoys company, but when she or he is left alone will be content hugging a teddy or blanket. Sagittarians are totally honest and expect to be treated openly and honestly in return. You may find that your child asks endless questions and will demand answers from you.

Most Sagittarians enjoy learning but will take a dislike to any rules that they see as pointless. They are sociable characters who should be allowed to take any opportunity to socialise. Parents should not pressure a Sagittarian child or be possessive over her. A young Sagittarian child may hide her hurts and disappointments and should, therefore, be encouraged to show feelings.

Sagittarians are generous and parents will have to give guidance about money from an early age. These children are restless and freedom loving, but they may need to be taught that there are some social rules that must be obeyed for their own good.

The typical Sagittarian can be a bit clumsy and will pick up knocks and bruises from falling over and bumping into things. From a health viewpoint, the typical Sagittarius may suffer from asthma.

You, Yes You, Are You a Psychic World Chess Player?

The standard chess game can be taught quickly although you may lose the first 20 games until you can learn strategies. The King is the feature of the game. You have to put the opposing player's King into such a position that he cannot move in any direction without being taken. This is called checkmate. All the other pieces are there to attack and defend the King. Next to the King you have the Queen, she can attack and move in any direction she is the mightiest piece on the board. On either side of the Queen are 2 Bishops. Here restrictions come into play. The Bishop can only travel diagonally across the board on its own colour square. On either side of the Bishops are Knights that move in an L shape configuration. At the end of each line are the Castles or Rooks that move square in any direction. On the forefront of each major piece are the pawns. Pawns can only move 1 forward: and diagonally 1 forward to take another piece off the board. The first pawn move can go forward 2 places. Stalemate is a drawn game where neither King can be placed in 'Check'. When a pawn reaches an opponents back line it becomes another Queen.

It is an exciting game that engages the brain to invent strategies, cunning, deviations and moves that distract your opponent.

In analogy the world is a huge chess board of intrigue and manipulation. There are many games being played at any one moment and each game has its own title. For instance the head of a country would be the king. Gender does not count they could be male or female. They could also be an elected leader or a despot. The queen is the symbol of an energetic policy, force or strategy and she both attacks and defends. By the side of the King and Queen are two Bishops. They are limited as to direction but can move in long or short play and defend or attack symbolising strategy. The Knights and Rooks become the 'back-up' or supporting entourage but also have the power to defend and the capability to destroy the Queen.

Finally, we arrive at the pawns the power or symbol of the people. They stand in line in front of the elected or positioned backline until they are worn down over a period and obliterated. In analogy this would mean they would be defeated by the oppositions supporting entourage, meaning a change of board. (Leader or Government.)

The power of the pawns is limited and after election or change becomes insignificant. Even though they elect the back line it is the King and Queen who dictate the policy. If the Queen is taken the knights, Rooks and Bishops have to mount a defence.

In undemocratic countries the opposition start the game lacking several pieces that in turn extends the time period and causes inaction on part of the opposition paralysing their positions. Once the opposition can support a full board their chances are evened.

In democratic countries the surprise forage by the opposition can quickly put the King in check and depending on the position of the Queen, checkmate, thus a change of power or Government. Another such action would be the loss of the Rooks and Bishops in support leaving the limited resources of the Knights. A coalition would be like playing with an extra back line they would need a long time extension causing an overcrowded board and confusion in movement. The Queens' in particular would have to know their moves and to play in conjunction. Finding the right moves would make them a formidable force but this could be wrecked by too many Rooks, Knights and Bishops. This crowded board could cause inaction or a step forward into danger.

The European chess board has slowed to a halt, the Queen not moving and changing her tactics over a long period. Here, the opposition goes to sleep and will in time be overrun. It is at the moment a never-ending game of stalemate still not finished. The game will never reach full play until the Queen finalises her Federal State the pawns will have then completely released all power to the back line. The board will be swamped with several back lines completely destroying any opposition. The backline from this will be reduced to a super King and Queen that are unstoppable. Two Rooks will become super banks controlling all before them with a ruthless doctrine disregarding their own and opposition pawns. The game now won, the opposition Queen and all her support are taken off the board. Several games and a while later a new game ensues the pawns gather strength filling 3 full lines in front of a new backline finally defeating the super Queen and King.

In the United States the game moves predictably into the next round. For years a near stalemate has existed but in the final moves a winner has to be found. The pawns have nearly wiped each other out as they move up the board. The Queens rallying support for their Kings try to out manoeuvre their opposition. One King, a venture capitalist, represents big business and needs to control his pawns. The beliefs of this King are in a financial bottom line policy, and he will use his Queen to take opposition pawns off the board.

The other King who won the last game has a struggling Queen. He needs more time to help make his strategies work. His rooks, Knights and Bishops need to be stronger and work harder. Pawns are a way forward and will be protected not sacrificed needlessly.

Your personal life is a three stage game. The stacked board before you represents your political leaders who semi- dominate your lifestyle. The local council is your first democratic vote yet very few people turn out to register their views. The national election is your second democratic vote but we are now sceptical of our MP's because their actual power has dwindled. The European election is your third democratic vote. This is a voice in the wilderness as few people know who their EMP's are or what they do. Very little is shown on TV as to how this huge machine works. How can 27 countries have the same values and ambitions?

As you reach the European chess board the game is massed against you as the board doubles in size. It is a mad clutter of differing ideologies and philosophies. Your opposing board is filled with kings and Queens and pawns and your moves are limited for there is nowhere to go without being taken. You are swamped as a great many pawns from the poorer countries head towards you for there are no restrictions laid down to follow. The dictates are now free entry to any part of this European Empire without obligation to any countries personal needs.

As you are outnumbered several European Rooks will become dominant taking over financial control of this huge beast. They will become omnipotent causing your part of the board to become paralysed and subjugated without a voice.

Don't worry, after all, it's only a game of chess... or is it?

You, Yes You, Are You a Psychic World Chess Player?

The standard chess game can be taught quickly although you may lose the first 20 games until you can learn strategies. The King is the feature of the game. You have to put the opposing player's King into such a position that he cannot move in any direction without being taken. This is called checkmate. All the other pieces are there to attack and defend the King. Next to the King you have the Queen, she can attack and move in any direction she is the mightiest piece on the board. On either side of the Queen are 2 Bishops. Here restrictions come into play. The Bishop can only travel diagonally across the board on its own colour square. On either side of the Bishops are Knights that move in an L shape configuration. At the end of each line are the Castles or Rooks that move square in any direction. On the forefront of each major piece are the pawns. Pawns can only move 1 forward: and diagonally 1 forward to take another piece off the board. The first pawn move can go forward 2 places. Stalemate is a drawn game where neither King can be placed in 'Check'. When a pawn reaches an opponents back line it becomes another Queen.

It is an exciting game that engages the brain to invent strategies, cunning, deviations and moves that distract your opponent.

In analogy the world is a huge chess board of intrigue and manipulation. There are many games being played at any one moment and each game has its own title. For instance the head of a country would be the king. Gender does not count they could be male or female. They could also be an elected leader or a despot. The queen is the symbol of an energetic policy, force or strategy and she both attacks and defends. By the side of the King and Queen are two Bishops. They are limited as to direction but can move in long or short play and defend or attack symbolising strategy. The Knights and Rooks become the 'back-up' or supporting entourage but also have the power to defend and the capability to destroy the Queen.

Finally, we arrive at the pawns the power or symbol of the people. They stand in line in front of the elected or positioned backline until they are worn down over a period and obliterated. In analogy this would mean they would be defeated by the oppositions supporting entourage, meaning a change of board. (Leader or Government.)

The power of the pawns is limited and after election or change becomes insignificant. Even though they elect the back line it is the King and Queen who dictate the policy. If the Queen is taken the knights, Rooks and Bishops have to mount a defence.

In undemocratic countries the opposition start the game lacking several pieces that in turn extends the time period and causes inaction on part of the opposition paralysing their positions. Once the opposition can support a full board their chances are evened.

In democratic countries the surprise forage by the opposition can quickly put the King in check and depending on the position of the Queen, checkmate, thus a change of power or Government. Another such action would be the loss of the Rooks and Bishops in support leaving the limited resources of the Knights. A coalition would be like playing with an extra back line they would need a long time extension causing an overcrowded board and confusion in movement. The Queens' in particular would have to know their moves and to play in conjunction. Finding the right moves would make them a formidable force but this could be wrecked by too many Rooks, Knights and Bishops. This crowded board could cause inaction or a step forward into danger.

The European chess board has slowed to a halt, the Queen not moving and changing her tactics over a long period. Here, the opposition goes to sleep and will in time be overrun. It is at the moment a never-ending game of stalemate still not finished. The game will never reach full play until the Queen finalises her Federal State the pawns will have then completely released all power to the back line. The board will be swamped with several back lines completely destroying any opposition. The backline from this will be reduced to a super King and Queen that are unstoppable. Two Rooks will become super banks controlling all before them with a ruthless doctrine disregarding their own and opposition pawns. The game now won, the opposition Queen and all her support are taken off the board. Several games and a while later a new game ensues the pawns gather strength filling 3 full lines in front of a new backline finally defeating the super Queen and King.

In the United States the game moves predictably into the next round. For years a near stalemate has existed but in the final moves a winner has to be found. The pawns have nearly wiped each other out as they move up the board. The Queens rallying support for their Kings try to out manoeuvre their opposition. One King, a venture capitalist, represents big business and needs to control his pawns. The beliefs of this King are in a financial bottom line policy, and he will use his Queen to take opposition pawns off the board.

The other King who won the last game has a struggling Queen. He needs more time to help make his strategies work. His rooks, Knights and Bishops need to be stronger and work harder. Pawns are a way forward and will be protected not sacrificed needlessly.

Your personal life is a three stage game. The stacked board before you represents your political leaders who semi- dominate your lifestyle. The local council is your first democratic vote yet very few people turn out to register their views. The national election is your second democratic vote but we are now sceptical of our MP's because their actual power has dwindled. The European election is your third democratic vote. This is a voice in the wilderness as few people know who their EMP's are or what they do. Very little is shown on TV as to how this huge machine works. How can 27 countries have the same values and ambitions?

As you reach the European chess board the game is massed against you as the board doubles in size. It is a mad clutter of differing ideologies and philosophies. Your opposing board is filled with kings and Queens and pawns and your moves are limited for there is nowhere to go without being taken. You are swamped as a great many pawns from the poorer countries head towards you for there are no restrictions laid down to follow. The dictates are now free entry to any part of this European Empire without obligation to any countries personal needs.

As you are outnumbered several European Rooks will become dominant taking over financial control of this huge beast. They will become omnipotent causing your part of the board to become paralysed and subjugated without a voice.

Don't worry, after all, it's only a game of chess... or is it?

You, Yes You, Are You a Psychic World Chess Player?

The standard chess game can be taught quickly although you may lose the first 20 games until you can learn strategies. The King is the feature of the game. You have to put the opposing player's King into such a position that he cannot move in any direction without being taken. This is called checkmate. All the other pieces are there to attack and defend the King. Next to the King you have the Queen, she can attack and move in any direction she is the mightiest piece on the board. On either side of the Queen are 2 Bishops. Here restrictions come into play. The Bishop can only travel diagonally across the board on its own colour square. On either side of the Bishops are Knights that move in an L shape configuration. At the end of each line are the Castles or Rooks that move square in any direction. On the forefront of each major piece are the pawns. Pawns can only move 1 forward: and diagonally 1 forward to take another piece off the board. The first pawn move can go forward 2 places. Stalemate is a drawn game where neither King can be placed in 'Check'. When a pawn reaches an opponents back line it becomes another Queen.

It is an exciting game that engages the brain to invent strategies, cunning, deviations and moves that distract your opponent.

In analogy the world is a huge chess board of intrigue and manipulation. There are many games being played at any one moment and each game has its own title. For instance the head of a country would be the king. Gender does not count they could be male or female. They could also be an elected leader or a despot. The queen is the symbol of an energetic policy, force or strategy and she both attacks and defends. By the side of the King and Queen are two Bishops. They are limited as to direction but can move in long or short play and defend or attack symbolising strategy. The Knights and Rooks become the 'back-up' or supporting entourage but also have the power to defend and the capability to destroy the Queen.

Finally, we arrive at the pawns the power or symbol of the people. They stand in line in front of the elected or positioned backline until they are worn down over a period and obliterated. In analogy this would mean they would be defeated by the oppositions supporting entourage, meaning a change of board. (Leader or Government.)

The power of the pawns is limited and after election or change becomes insignificant. Even though they elect the back line it is the King and Queen who dictate the policy. If the Queen is taken the knights, Rooks and Bishops have to mount a defence.

In undemocratic countries the opposition start the game lacking several pieces that in turn extends the time period and causes inaction on part of the opposition paralysing their positions. Once the opposition can support a full board their chances are evened.

In democratic countries the surprise forage by the opposition can quickly put the King in check and depending on the position of the Queen, checkmate, thus a change of power or Government. Another such action would be the loss of the Rooks and Bishops in support leaving the limited resources of the Knights. A coalition would be like playing with an extra back line they would need a long time extension causing an overcrowded board and confusion in movement. The Queens' in particular would have to know their moves and to play in conjunction. Finding the right moves would make them a formidable force but this could be wrecked by too many Rooks, Knights and Bishops. This crowded board could cause inaction or a step forward into danger.

The European chess board has slowed to a halt, the Queen not moving and changing her tactics over a long period. Here, the opposition goes to sleep and will in time be overrun. It is at the moment a never-ending game of stalemate still not finished. The game will never reach full play until the Queen finalises her Federal State the pawns will have then completely released all power to the back line. The board will be swamped with several back lines completely destroying any opposition. The backline from this will be reduced to a super King and Queen that are unstoppable. Two Rooks will become super banks controlling all before them with a ruthless doctrine disregarding their own and opposition pawns. The game now won, the opposition Queen and all her support are taken off the board. Several games and a while later a new game ensues the pawns gather strength filling 3 full lines in front of a new backline finally defeating the super Queen and King.

In the United States the game moves predictably into the next round. For years a near stalemate has existed but in the final moves a winner has to be found. The pawns have nearly wiped each other out as they move up the board. The Queens rallying support for their Kings try to out manoeuvre their opposition. One King, a venture capitalist, represents big business and needs to control his pawns. The beliefs of this King are in a financial bottom line policy, and he will use his Queen to take opposition pawns off the board.

The other King who won the last game has a struggling Queen. He needs more time to help make his strategies work. His rooks, Knights and Bishops need to be stronger and work harder. Pawns are a way forward and will be protected not sacrificed needlessly.

Your personal life is a three stage game. The stacked board before you represents your political leaders who semi- dominate your lifestyle. The local council is your first democratic vote yet very few people turn out to register their views. The national election is your second democratic vote but we are now sceptical of our MP's because their actual power has dwindled. The European election is your third democratic vote. This is a voice in the wilderness as few people know who their EMP's are or what they do. Very little is shown on TV as to how this huge machine works. How can 27 countries have the same values and ambitions?

As you reach the European chess board the game is massed against you as the board doubles in size. It is a mad clutter of differing ideologies and philosophies. Your opposing board is filled with kings and Queens and pawns and your moves are limited for there is nowhere to go without being taken. You are swamped as a great many pawns from the poorer countries head towards you for there are no restrictions laid down to follow. The dictates are now free entry to any part of this European Empire without obligation to any countries personal needs.

As you are outnumbered several European Rooks will become dominant taking over financial control of this huge beast. They will become omnipotent causing your part of the board to become paralysed and subjugated without a voice.

Don't worry, after all, it's only a game of chess... or is it?

You, Yes You, Are You a Psychic World Chess Player?

The standard chess game can be taught quickly although you may lose the first 20 games until you can learn strategies. The King is the feature of the game. You have to put the opposing player's King into such a position that he cannot move in any direction without being taken. This is called checkmate. All the other pieces are there to attack and defend the King. Next to the King you have the Queen, she can attack and move in any direction she is the mightiest piece on the board. On either side of the Queen are 2 Bishops. Here restrictions come into play. The Bishop can only travel diagonally across the board on its own colour square. On either side of the Bishops are Knights that move in an L shape configuration. At the end of each line are the Castles or Rooks that move square in any direction. On the forefront of each major piece are the pawns. Pawns can only move 1 forward: and diagonally 1 forward to take another piece off the board. The first pawn move can go forward 2 places. Stalemate is a drawn game where neither King can be placed in 'Check'. When a pawn reaches an opponents back line it becomes another Queen.

It is an exciting game that engages the brain to invent strategies, cunning, deviations and moves that distract your opponent.

In analogy the world is a huge chess board of intrigue and manipulation. There are many games being played at any one moment and each game has its own title. For instance the head of a country would be the king. Gender does not count they could be male or female. They could also be an elected leader or a despot. The queen is the symbol of an energetic policy, force or strategy and she both attacks and defends. By the side of the King and Queen are two Bishops. They are limited as to direction but can move in long or short play and defend or attack symbolising strategy. The Knights and Rooks become the 'back-up' or supporting entourage but also have the power to defend and the capability to destroy the Queen.

Finally, we arrive at the pawns the power or symbol of the people. They stand in line in front of the elected or positioned backline until they are worn down over a period and obliterated. In analogy this would mean they would be defeated by the oppositions supporting entourage, meaning a change of board. (Leader or Government.)

The power of the pawns is limited and after election or change becomes insignificant. Even though they elect the back line it is the King and Queen who dictate the policy. If the Queen is taken the knights, Rooks and Bishops have to mount a defence.

In undemocratic countries the opposition start the game lacking several pieces that in turn extends the time period and causes inaction on part of the opposition paralysing their positions. Once the opposition can support a full board their chances are evened.

In democratic countries the surprise forage by the opposition can quickly put the King in check and depending on the position of the Queen, checkmate, thus a change of power or Government. Another such action would be the loss of the Rooks and Bishops in support leaving the limited resources of the Knights. A coalition would be like playing with an extra back line they would need a long time extension causing an overcrowded board and confusion in movement. The Queens' in particular would have to know their moves and to play in conjunction. Finding the right moves would make them a formidable force but this could be wrecked by too many Rooks, Knights and Bishops. This crowded board could cause inaction or a step forward into danger.

The European chess board has slowed to a halt, the Queen not moving and changing her tactics over a long period. Here, the opposition goes to sleep and will in time be overrun. It is at the moment a never-ending game of stalemate still not finished. The game will never reach full play until the Queen finalises her Federal State the pawns will have then completely released all power to the back line. The board will be swamped with several back lines completely destroying any opposition. The backline from this will be reduced to a super King and Queen that are unstoppable. Two Rooks will become super banks controlling all before them with a ruthless doctrine disregarding their own and opposition pawns. The game now won, the opposition Queen and all her support are taken off the board. Several games and a while later a new game ensues the pawns gather strength filling 3 full lines in front of a new backline finally defeating the super Queen and King.

In the United States the game moves predictably into the next round. For years a near stalemate has existed but in the final moves a winner has to be found. The pawns have nearly wiped each other out as they move up the board. The Queens rallying support for their Kings try to out manoeuvre their opposition. One King, a venture capitalist, represents big business and needs to control his pawns. The beliefs of this King are in a financial bottom line policy, and he will use his Queen to take opposition pawns off the board.

The other King who won the last game has a struggling Queen. He needs more time to help make his strategies work. His rooks, Knights and Bishops need to be stronger and work harder. Pawns are a way forward and will be protected not sacrificed needlessly.

Your personal life is a three stage game. The stacked board before you represents your political leaders who semi- dominate your lifestyle. The local council is your first democratic vote yet very few people turn out to register their views. The national election is your second democratic vote but we are now sceptical of our MP's because their actual power has dwindled. The European election is your third democratic vote. This is a voice in the wilderness as few people know who their EMP's are or what they do. Very little is shown on TV as to how this huge machine works. How can 27 countries have the same values and ambitions?

As you reach the European chess board the game is massed against you as the board doubles in size. It is a mad clutter of differing ideologies and philosophies. Your opposing board is filled with kings and Queens and pawns and your moves are limited for there is nowhere to go without being taken. You are swamped as a great many pawns from the poorer countries head towards you for there are no restrictions laid down to follow. The dictates are now free entry to any part of this European Empire without obligation to any countries personal needs.

As you are outnumbered several European Rooks will become dominant taking over financial control of this huge beast. They will become omnipotent causing your part of the board to become paralysed and subjugated without a voice.

Don't worry, after all, it's only a game of chess... or is it?

How to Write an eBook Fast and Not Fail in the Attempt

Do you want to create an eBook to give away as a freebie to promote your business? Do you want to create an eBook and sell it in your Sales Page?

Creating an eBook is actually pretty easy, but it is very important to make a plan of action before you start working on it. For most of the people who are working online, eBooks are a skill that must be learned, sooner or later. You will use it Always on your Squeeze Page to build a List of subscribers, or you will create a high quality content eBook to sell it on places like ClickBank.

Most of us learn the correct way by trial and error, evaluating on each eBook we create what went wrong and what can we do make it look better, with more content, without spending too much additional time.

So... let me explain how to create an eBook fast and easy, using basic tools that are available for all of us, like MS Paint or Microsoft Word, or free source software.

The first thing you need to do is make a plan of what do you want to create, and how to do it. I will display some basic steps and I will explain them in detail:

eBook First Page - Title and Logo Copyright Statement eBook Footer Table of Contents Body - Content separated in sections Final Thoughts Section

1) The first page of the eBook, I will adventure to say that it is the most important page in your eBook. Why? simply because it is the first impression of your audience. A poorly designed Logo will drive away the attention of your visitors.

Here you can design a nice Title with a program like Photoshop or Gimp, or use a nice font in an appropriate size to cover at least 30% of the page.

Now for the Logo, my best suggestion is to outsource the job to a graphic designer, to guarantee a high quality image to put in front of the eyes of your prospects. If you don't want to invest money here, you can create it yourself, or a good way to work on this is to get Public Domain images, and then edit them adding something catchy. Make sure to use 50% page space for this image. The remaining 20% will go for the Footer (explained in point 3).

2) The Copyright Statement. The best suggestion is to place it on the second page, near the bottom. In this section you will write what can people do and what can't they do with your copy of the eBook. Insert an image of your signature to make it look more professional. You can write here if you want people to give away your eBook for free, if you allow them to resell it (if it is a paid one), or if you forbid any kind of modifications to your copy.

3) The Footer, this is the place where you will write down the URL of your website. This footer will be in every page of your eBook, and it's perfect to call for your reader's attention, and get more traffic to your websites. This is ideal for List Building, because eBook Marketing is a very powerful traffic source to exploit in your business, and the footer will do it passively for you, even if you don't intend to use your eBook as a source to attract visitors to your website. Along with the website URL you can add a small description as well.

4) This is the Page where you display all the content of your eBook, separated with Titles that go with their respective Pages, to allow your readers to go directly to the sections they are most interested. I know some people who don't create Table of Contents, but hey, and eBook is like a regular Book but in digital format right? and a regular Book always have a Table of Contents. My best advice? Use it.

5) The body, the backbone of your eBook. You will write all the content in this section. Make sure to separate the sections correctly, maintain a logic order in what you are writing, and add some pictures in time to time, but not too much (the extra pages you gain adding pictures would make you lose credibility when a visitor sees the content very over populated with pictures). The eBook in total should have at least 30 to 40 pages, if you want to create something decent with high quality content. If you are going to create an eBook to sell, then it MUST have more than 100 pages. This is important, many people create junk eBooks and sell them for a couple of dollars, and when you open it you discover a ten pages eBook with duplicate content and a lot of garbage in it. If you are serious in your business, please do it right and you will have much more success than those guys.

6) This is a section I always add in my eBooks, totally optional. In this section you can tell your readers what do you think about the topic of the eBook, and it allows you to show a human presence to the content of your copy. You can add here as well a small description of what to do and why you created the eBook. People like to see that there is a human face behind the things they are after, and that is good for both sides, for you gaining a new raving fan / subscriber, and them getting in touch with you.

So, you now know how to write an eBook fast and easy, it just takes some time to get used, but the effort is highly rewarded. It will help you to increase your writing skills, and all the skills required to create every aspect of your eBook with your personal touch.

Writing an eBook - The 5 Most Important Tips for Newbies   Success Is Subjective When It Comes to EBooking the Author of the Article Explained   How an eBook Makes You an Expert in Your Field   

Review of the Original Dance from the 2005 World Figure Skating Championships

The judges ranking and their score for the OD are in parentheses.

1) Belbin/Agosto (2, 67.54) It is quite ironic that after spending all season complaining bout how much I dislike this program that I am ranking it first at worlds. But I feel they were the clear winners of the OD. They attacked this program and nailed everything. I got a good laugh at the British Eurosport's commentators trying to find something about this performance to criticize and coming up with 'Their arms weren't always in perfect unison,' because if that is the biggest problem with any program, it was obviously skated fabulously. The Charleston and quickstep were arguably the best of the night, and their foxtrot was almost up to the level it was four seasons ago. The choreography still is not very good, but their performance overcame that and made you forget about the it.

2) Navka/Kostomarov (1, 68.67) This is by no means a bad program, but it is also not a great program. Both the quickstep and foxtrot were done well, but not amazingly so. Still, the transitions are 1000% better than they were a season ago, making this actually looks somewhat like a dance program, instead of a pairs program with dance elements. And how can one not give them points for their extremely original musical selection of "Sing Sing Sing"? But as neither the difficulty level nor the interpretation was up to the level of Belbin/Agosto's, they deserved to place second.

3) Chait/Sakhnovski (5, 61.19) After placing 3rd at the GPF in the OD, I was crossing my fingers that their placement would be the same here. Unfortunately, the judges failed me. They, unlike the teams directly below them, had great interpretation of the rhythms and skated without any mistakes. And their energy level, as always, was ridiculously high. Plus, their skating skills, while not quite as good as the skating skills of the very best in the world, have improved so much that they should challenge those other teams.

4) Denkova/Staviski (4, 62.79) Awkward OD interpretation, but thy did skate all out. Their skating skills - and the fact that they too did not mess up, held them above the other teams here. Still, this OD is very forgettable.

5) Delobel/Schoenfelder (6, 60.25) Had Isabelle not made a small mistake on the sbs footwork sequence, they would have been challenging the top teams. Unfortunately, she did. Isabelle has nice interpretation, and even Olivier seems less lifeless than usual. Plus, the choreography is superb. The only other problem is that they are slightly off-beat for part of the foxtrot.

6) Grushina/Goncharov (3, 63.17) This program has many of they same weaknesses as B/A's does, which should not be a surprise, considering it is basically the same program. (Morozov's creativity or lack there of has sunk to a new low for "his" programs for G/G this season.) But unfortunately for them, they do not have B/A's technical strengths and charisma. Elena is lovely as always; Ruslan is dull as always. And I'm still waiting for them to finish their sbs footwork. Somebody needs to go out and push them during any footwork sequence.

7) Domnina/Shabalin (7, 58.86) These two probably had the best foxtrot interpretation of the season. It was graceful, musical, and truly brought the classical foxtrot to the ice. They even made their dance spin seem foxtrot-y. The sbs footwork didn't seem very powerful, and their twizzles, while miles better than many of the other team's, were a bit shaky. The quickstep was okay.

8) Dubreuil/Lauzon (8,58.30) Argh. The foxtrot and quickstep sections were extremely well-interpreted and the whole dance was extremely cohesive for a combination OD. But the sbs footwork was a complete and utter disaster. It got messed up about 1/3 of the way through, and they never quite got it back on track. There was a little to much of time spent not touching each other. And their Charleston was a bit awkward in places. Plus, why are they miming holding umbrellas? Isn't the whole point of "Singin' in the Rain" that one is singing in the rain, and not covered by umbrellas?

9) Faiella/Scali (9, 56.13) Their stroking has improved dramatically. Their twizzles still aren't very good. And they didn't really seem to truly get either rhythm, especially the quickstep. But technically, it was a strong program, and they had good energy as always,

10) Wing/Lowe (10, 52.52) They start off with a nice, although slightly dull, foxtrot. And then they transition into a nice, but slightly dull Charleston. I normally really like this team, but this performance seemed to lack energy. They don't have the technical content of the teams above them.

11) Fraser/Lukanin (13, 48.82) Their speed and polished has dramatically improved. Very nice foxtrot expression. They spend a little too much time apart. They had nice musicality too.

12) Kerr/Kerr (11, 50.71) There's still a fairly sizable gap between her skills and his, although he has improved. They have nice foxtrot expression. Theirs twizzles in the sbs footwork was very messy towards the end. Their quickstep was fine, but not quite as good as the foxtrot.

13) Gregory/Petukhov (12, 50.22) I got the advice to only watch him, not her, and I enjoyed them much more than usual. Interpret that as you want. Of course, then I missed the mistake she made on the twizzles during the sbs footwork, which also lacked flow. Decent Charleston expression. Too much stroking in foxtrot section.

14) Kulikova/Novikov (14, 48.72) She did best with the quickstep, while he shone in the foxtrot. Second quickstep had very little traditional quickstep character. They had a slightly messy quality overall.

I did not rank the rest of the teams.

Hoffman/Elek (17, 45.34) They start with a foxtrot, which was absolutely lovely and really captured the rhythm. The quickstep was very good too, but did not quite work as well as the foxtrot. And somebody needs to teach Atilla to twizzle, because I'm sick of him messing those up, as he did on the sbs footwork. And then he had trouble lifting Nora on the final lift, although a portion of that can probably be blamed on her 472346 pound dress. But overall, this was a very nice OD.

Gudina/Beletski (18, 42.85) They start off with an enthusiastic Charleston. But the foxtrot was dull, with little difficulty. And unfortunately they could not pick up the energy level with the final quickstep section, to Dancing Fool of all songs.

Watanabe/Kido (15, 46.57) A very good and in-character quickstep. Diagonal footwork could flow better. Their foxtrot was good, but not quite as in character as the quickstep. He has some trouble with the last lift.

Grebenkina/Azronjan (16, 46.02) Great energy, and their movements are very dance-y and fit the quickstep well. Their foxtrot is to extremely odd music - just a rhythm and no melody. But they end with another well-done quickstep section.

Beier/Beier (20, 41.66) Very cute and charming, with a good ballroom interpretation of the rhythms.

Kauc/Zych (22, 40.92) Fabulous foxtrot expression. Twizzles during sbs footwork were messy. Basic skating is very good. This program lacked the falls that their programs usually have, but it also lacked the energy and attack. Their quickstep expression is also very nice.

Pechalat/Bourzat (23, 40.71) They start with a very charming and well characterized Charleston. But she takes a bad fall during the sbs footwork. Their musicality in the foxtrot was good, but the choreography wasn't very ballroom. They fixed that during a great quickstep section.

Yang/Gao (19, 42.67) Decent foxtrot. She hits a lovely position during the lift. She's very charming. Charleston is nice too. He looks to have trouble rotating the final lift.

Golovina/Voika (21, 41.57) They start with movements that seem to exaggerated for the more subtle foxtrot rhythm. But they still have good musicality and energy. Decent quickstep, but again the movements don't fit the rhythm very well.

Munana/Munana (25, 36.31) As sick as I am of Chicago ODs, this one was great. Both rhythms, especially the Charleston, were interpreted fabulously. Both skaters sparkled. They clearly do not have the technical ability of the top teams, but if they can ad technical content in the future, they most definitely will be contenders.

Akimova/Shakalov (29, 31.35) Very polished, but little else going for them. He tripped on the sbs footwork. Diagonal footwork is . Their musicality is pretty good.

Aureli/Vaturi (24, 38.66) They start off with a lot of dancing in place. They have somewhat poor ice coverage on the sbs steps. But they have a good understanding of both the quickstep and foxtrot. Unfortunately, they really lack in technical content.

Haunstetter/Hoenlein (27. 33.00) Chicago. Again. But they have a very good Charleston, and his foot position during the lift was fabulous. Ugly and out-of-sync twizzles. The rest of the sbs wasn't much better. They looked like they were skating two different programs during the sbs steps. He is terrific.

Buck/Nelson-Bond (28, 32.85) Good Charleston expression. Pretty good speed through diagonal footwork. She hits great positions in their lifts. Their weakness seems to be basic skating. They also had unison trouble on the sbs footwork.

Keller/Keller (26, 33.23) Really weird Charleston music. Decent musicality. Their program is very empty. They also lacked energy. Their quickstep expression was the best of the three rhythms.

Galcheniuk/Krupen (30, 28.14) Most of their skating is decent. Their programs aren't empty, and their musical interpretation is okay. Plus, they have nice energy. Unfortunately, nothing about their skating is anything better than decent, especially their basic skating.

Review of the Original Dance from the 2005 World Figure Skating Championships

The judges ranking and their score for the OD are in parentheses.

1) Belbin/Agosto (2, 67.54) It is quite ironic that after spending all season complaining bout how much I dislike this program that I am ranking it first at worlds. But I feel they were the clear winners of the OD. They attacked this program and nailed everything. I got a good laugh at the British Eurosport's commentators trying to find something about this performance to criticize and coming up with 'Their arms weren't always in perfect unison,' because if that is the biggest problem with any program, it was obviously skated fabulously. The Charleston and quickstep were arguably the best of the night, and their foxtrot was almost up to the level it was four seasons ago. The choreography still is not very good, but their performance overcame that and made you forget about the it.

2) Navka/Kostomarov (1, 68.67) This is by no means a bad program, but it is also not a great program. Both the quickstep and foxtrot were done well, but not amazingly so. Still, the transitions are 1000% better than they were a season ago, making this actually looks somewhat like a dance program, instead of a pairs program with dance elements. And how can one not give them points for their extremely original musical selection of "Sing Sing Sing"? But as neither the difficulty level nor the interpretation was up to the level of Belbin/Agosto's, they deserved to place second.

3) Chait/Sakhnovski (5, 61.19) After placing 3rd at the GPF in the OD, I was crossing my fingers that their placement would be the same here. Unfortunately, the judges failed me. They, unlike the teams directly below them, had great interpretation of the rhythms and skated without any mistakes. And their energy level, as always, was ridiculously high. Plus, their skating skills, while not quite as good as the skating skills of the very best in the world, have improved so much that they should challenge those other teams.

4) Denkova/Staviski (4, 62.79) Awkward OD interpretation, but thy did skate all out. Their skating skills - and the fact that they too did not mess up, held them above the other teams here. Still, this OD is very forgettable.

5) Delobel/Schoenfelder (6, 60.25) Had Isabelle not made a small mistake on the sbs footwork sequence, they would have been challenging the top teams. Unfortunately, she did. Isabelle has nice interpretation, and even Olivier seems less lifeless than usual. Plus, the choreography is superb. The only other problem is that they are slightly off-beat for part of the foxtrot.

6) Grushina/Goncharov (3, 63.17) This program has many of they same weaknesses as B/A's does, which should not be a surprise, considering it is basically the same program. (Morozov's creativity or lack there of has sunk to a new low for "his" programs for G/G this season.) But unfortunately for them, they do not have B/A's technical strengths and charisma. Elena is lovely as always; Ruslan is dull as always. And I'm still waiting for them to finish their sbs footwork. Somebody needs to go out and push them during any footwork sequence.

7) Domnina/Shabalin (7, 58.86) These two probably had the best foxtrot interpretation of the season. It was graceful, musical, and truly brought the classical foxtrot to the ice. They even made their dance spin seem foxtrot-y. The sbs footwork didn't seem very powerful, and their twizzles, while miles better than many of the other team's, were a bit shaky. The quickstep was okay.

8) Dubreuil/Lauzon (8,58.30) Argh. The foxtrot and quickstep sections were extremely well-interpreted and the whole dance was extremely cohesive for a combination OD. But the sbs footwork was a complete and utter disaster. It got messed up about 1/3 of the way through, and they never quite got it back on track. There was a little to much of time spent not touching each other. And their Charleston was a bit awkward in places. Plus, why are they miming holding umbrellas? Isn't the whole point of "Singin' in the Rain" that one is singing in the rain, and not covered by umbrellas?

9) Faiella/Scali (9, 56.13) Their stroking has improved dramatically. Their twizzles still aren't very good. And they didn't really seem to truly get either rhythm, especially the quickstep. But technically, it was a strong program, and they had good energy as always,

10) Wing/Lowe (10, 52.52) They start off with a nice, although slightly dull, foxtrot. And then they transition into a nice, but slightly dull Charleston. I normally really like this team, but this performance seemed to lack energy. They don't have the technical content of the teams above them.

11) Fraser/Lukanin (13, 48.82) Their speed and polished has dramatically improved. Very nice foxtrot expression. They spend a little too much time apart. They had nice musicality too.

12) Kerr/Kerr (11, 50.71) There's still a fairly sizable gap between her skills and his, although he has improved. They have nice foxtrot expression. Theirs twizzles in the sbs footwork was very messy towards the end. Their quickstep was fine, but not quite as good as the foxtrot.

13) Gregory/Petukhov (12, 50.22) I got the advice to only watch him, not her, and I enjoyed them much more than usual. Interpret that as you want. Of course, then I missed the mistake she made on the twizzles during the sbs footwork, which also lacked flow. Decent Charleston expression. Too much stroking in foxtrot section.

14) Kulikova/Novikov (14, 48.72) She did best with the quickstep, while he shone in the foxtrot. Second quickstep had very little traditional quickstep character. They had a slightly messy quality overall.

I did not rank the rest of the teams.

Hoffman/Elek (17, 45.34) They start with a foxtrot, which was absolutely lovely and really captured the rhythm. The quickstep was very good too, but did not quite work as well as the foxtrot. And somebody needs to teach Atilla to twizzle, because I'm sick of him messing those up, as he did on the sbs footwork. And then he had trouble lifting Nora on the final lift, although a portion of that can probably be blamed on her 472346 pound dress. But overall, this was a very nice OD.

Gudina/Beletski (18, 42.85) They start off with an enthusiastic Charleston. But the foxtrot was dull, with little difficulty. And unfortunately they could not pick up the energy level with the final quickstep section, to Dancing Fool of all songs.

Watanabe/Kido (15, 46.57) A very good and in-character quickstep. Diagonal footwork could flow better. Their foxtrot was good, but not quite as in character as the quickstep. He has some trouble with the last lift.

Grebenkina/Azronjan (16, 46.02) Great energy, and their movements are very dance-y and fit the quickstep well. Their foxtrot is to extremely odd music - just a rhythm and no melody. But they end with another well-done quickstep section.

Beier/Beier (20, 41.66) Very cute and charming, with a good ballroom interpretation of the rhythms.

Kauc/Zych (22, 40.92) Fabulous foxtrot expression. Twizzles during sbs footwork were messy. Basic skating is very good. This program lacked the falls that their programs usually have, but it also lacked the energy and attack. Their quickstep expression is also very nice.

Pechalat/Bourzat (23, 40.71) They start with a very charming and well characterized Charleston. But she takes a bad fall during the sbs footwork. Their musicality in the foxtrot was good, but the choreography wasn't very ballroom. They fixed that during a great quickstep section.

Yang/Gao (19, 42.67) Decent foxtrot. She hits a lovely position during the lift. She's very charming. Charleston is nice too. He looks to have trouble rotating the final lift.

Golovina/Voika (21, 41.57) They start with movements that seem to exaggerated for the more subtle foxtrot rhythm. But they still have good musicality and energy. Decent quickstep, but again the movements don't fit the rhythm very well.

Munana/Munana (25, 36.31) As sick as I am of Chicago ODs, this one was great. Both rhythms, especially the Charleston, were interpreted fabulously. Both skaters sparkled. They clearly do not have the technical ability of the top teams, but if they can ad technical content in the future, they most definitely will be contenders.

Akimova/Shakalov (29, 31.35) Very polished, but little else going for them. He tripped on the sbs footwork. Diagonal footwork is . Their musicality is pretty good.

Aureli/Vaturi (24, 38.66) They start off with a lot of dancing in place. They have somewhat poor ice coverage on the sbs steps. But they have a good understanding of both the quickstep and foxtrot. Unfortunately, they really lack in technical content.

Haunstetter/Hoenlein (27. 33.00) Chicago. Again. But they have a very good Charleston, and his foot position during the lift was fabulous. Ugly and out-of-sync twizzles. The rest of the sbs wasn't much better. They looked like they were skating two different programs during the sbs steps. He is terrific.

Buck/Nelson-Bond (28, 32.85) Good Charleston expression. Pretty good speed through diagonal footwork. She hits great positions in their lifts. Their weakness seems to be basic skating. They also had unison trouble on the sbs footwork.

Keller/Keller (26, 33.23) Really weird Charleston music. Decent musicality. Their program is very empty. They also lacked energy. Their quickstep expression was the best of the three rhythms.

Galcheniuk/Krupen (30, 28.14) Most of their skating is decent. Their programs aren't empty, and their musical interpretation is okay. Plus, they have nice energy. Unfortunately, nothing about their skating is anything better than decent, especially their basic skating.

Review of the Original Dance from the 2005 World Figure Skating Championships

The judges ranking and their score for the OD are in parentheses.

1) Belbin/Agosto (2, 67.54) It is quite ironic that after spending all season complaining bout how much I dislike this program that I am ranking it first at worlds. But I feel they were the clear winners of the OD. They attacked this program and nailed everything. I got a good laugh at the British Eurosport's commentators trying to find something about this performance to criticize and coming up with 'Their arms weren't always in perfect unison,' because if that is the biggest problem with any program, it was obviously skated fabulously. The Charleston and quickstep were arguably the best of the night, and their foxtrot was almost up to the level it was four seasons ago. The choreography still is not very good, but their performance overcame that and made you forget about the it.

2) Navka/Kostomarov (1, 68.67) This is by no means a bad program, but it is also not a great program. Both the quickstep and foxtrot were done well, but not amazingly so. Still, the transitions are 1000% better than they were a season ago, making this actually looks somewhat like a dance program, instead of a pairs program with dance elements. And how can one not give them points for their extremely original musical selection of "Sing Sing Sing"? But as neither the difficulty level nor the interpretation was up to the level of Belbin/Agosto's, they deserved to place second.

3) Chait/Sakhnovski (5, 61.19) After placing 3rd at the GPF in the OD, I was crossing my fingers that their placement would be the same here. Unfortunately, the judges failed me. They, unlike the teams directly below them, had great interpretation of the rhythms and skated without any mistakes. And their energy level, as always, was ridiculously high. Plus, their skating skills, while not quite as good as the skating skills of the very best in the world, have improved so much that they should challenge those other teams.

4) Denkova/Staviski (4, 62.79) Awkward OD interpretation, but thy did skate all out. Their skating skills - and the fact that they too did not mess up, held them above the other teams here. Still, this OD is very forgettable.

5) Delobel/Schoenfelder (6, 60.25) Had Isabelle not made a small mistake on the sbs footwork sequence, they would have been challenging the top teams. Unfortunately, she did. Isabelle has nice interpretation, and even Olivier seems less lifeless than usual. Plus, the choreography is superb. The only other problem is that they are slightly off-beat for part of the foxtrot.

6) Grushina/Goncharov (3, 63.17) This program has many of they same weaknesses as B/A's does, which should not be a surprise, considering it is basically the same program. (Morozov's creativity or lack there of has sunk to a new low for "his" programs for G/G this season.) But unfortunately for them, they do not have B/A's technical strengths and charisma. Elena is lovely as always; Ruslan is dull as always. And I'm still waiting for them to finish their sbs footwork. Somebody needs to go out and push them during any footwork sequence.

7) Domnina/Shabalin (7, 58.86) These two probably had the best foxtrot interpretation of the season. It was graceful, musical, and truly brought the classical foxtrot to the ice. They even made their dance spin seem foxtrot-y. The sbs footwork didn't seem very powerful, and their twizzles, while miles better than many of the other team's, were a bit shaky. The quickstep was okay.

8) Dubreuil/Lauzon (8,58.30) Argh. The foxtrot and quickstep sections were extremely well-interpreted and the whole dance was extremely cohesive for a combination OD. But the sbs footwork was a complete and utter disaster. It got messed up about 1/3 of the way through, and they never quite got it back on track. There was a little to much of time spent not touching each other. And their Charleston was a bit awkward in places. Plus, why are they miming holding umbrellas? Isn't the whole point of "Singin' in the Rain" that one is singing in the rain, and not covered by umbrellas?

9) Faiella/Scali (9, 56.13) Their stroking has improved dramatically. Their twizzles still aren't very good. And they didn't really seem to truly get either rhythm, especially the quickstep. But technically, it was a strong program, and they had good energy as always,

10) Wing/Lowe (10, 52.52) They start off with a nice, although slightly dull, foxtrot. And then they transition into a nice, but slightly dull Charleston. I normally really like this team, but this performance seemed to lack energy. They don't have the technical content of the teams above them.

11) Fraser/Lukanin (13, 48.82) Their speed and polished has dramatically improved. Very nice foxtrot expression. They spend a little too much time apart. They had nice musicality too.

12) Kerr/Kerr (11, 50.71) There's still a fairly sizable gap between her skills and his, although he has improved. They have nice foxtrot expression. Theirs twizzles in the sbs footwork was very messy towards the end. Their quickstep was fine, but not quite as good as the foxtrot.

13) Gregory/Petukhov (12, 50.22) I got the advice to only watch him, not her, and I enjoyed them much more than usual. Interpret that as you want. Of course, then I missed the mistake she made on the twizzles during the sbs footwork, which also lacked flow. Decent Charleston expression. Too much stroking in foxtrot section.

14) Kulikova/Novikov (14, 48.72) She did best with the quickstep, while he shone in the foxtrot. Second quickstep had very little traditional quickstep character. They had a slightly messy quality overall.

I did not rank the rest of the teams.

Hoffman/Elek (17, 45.34) They start with a foxtrot, which was absolutely lovely and really captured the rhythm. The quickstep was very good too, but did not quite work as well as the foxtrot. And somebody needs to teach Atilla to twizzle, because I'm sick of him messing those up, as he did on the sbs footwork. And then he had trouble lifting Nora on the final lift, although a portion of that can probably be blamed on her 472346 pound dress. But overall, this was a very nice OD.

Gudina/Beletski (18, 42.85) They start off with an enthusiastic Charleston. But the foxtrot was dull, with little difficulty. And unfortunately they could not pick up the energy level with the final quickstep section, to Dancing Fool of all songs.

Watanabe/Kido (15, 46.57) A very good and in-character quickstep. Diagonal footwork could flow better. Their foxtrot was good, but not quite as in character as the quickstep. He has some trouble with the last lift.

Grebenkina/Azronjan (16, 46.02) Great energy, and their movements are very dance-y and fit the quickstep well. Their foxtrot is to extremely odd music - just a rhythm and no melody. But they end with another well-done quickstep section.

Beier/Beier (20, 41.66) Very cute and charming, with a good ballroom interpretation of the rhythms.

Kauc/Zych (22, 40.92) Fabulous foxtrot expression. Twizzles during sbs footwork were messy. Basic skating is very good. This program lacked the falls that their programs usually have, but it also lacked the energy and attack. Their quickstep expression is also very nice.

Pechalat/Bourzat (23, 40.71) They start with a very charming and well characterized Charleston. But she takes a bad fall during the sbs footwork. Their musicality in the foxtrot was good, but the choreography wasn't very ballroom. They fixed that during a great quickstep section.

Yang/Gao (19, 42.67) Decent foxtrot. She hits a lovely position during the lift. She's very charming. Charleston is nice too. He looks to have trouble rotating the final lift.

Golovina/Voika (21, 41.57) They start with movements that seem to exaggerated for the more subtle foxtrot rhythm. But they still have good musicality and energy. Decent quickstep, but again the movements don't fit the rhythm very well.

Munana/Munana (25, 36.31) As sick as I am of Chicago ODs, this one was great. Both rhythms, especially the Charleston, were interpreted fabulously. Both skaters sparkled. They clearly do not have the technical ability of the top teams, but if they can ad technical content in the future, they most definitely will be contenders.

Akimova/Shakalov (29, 31.35) Very polished, but little else going for them. He tripped on the sbs footwork. Diagonal footwork is . Their musicality is pretty good.

Aureli/Vaturi (24, 38.66) They start off with a lot of dancing in place. They have somewhat poor ice coverage on the sbs steps. But they have a good understanding of both the quickstep and foxtrot. Unfortunately, they really lack in technical content.

Haunstetter/Hoenlein (27. 33.00) Chicago. Again. But they have a very good Charleston, and his foot position during the lift was fabulous. Ugly and out-of-sync twizzles. The rest of the sbs wasn't much better. They looked like they were skating two different programs during the sbs steps. He is terrific.

Buck/Nelson-Bond (28, 32.85) Good Charleston expression. Pretty good speed through diagonal footwork. She hits great positions in their lifts. Their weakness seems to be basic skating. They also had unison trouble on the sbs footwork.

Keller/Keller (26, 33.23) Really weird Charleston music. Decent musicality. Their program is very empty. They also lacked energy. Their quickstep expression was the best of the three rhythms.

Galcheniuk/Krupen (30, 28.14) Most of their skating is decent. Their programs aren't empty, and their musical interpretation is okay. Plus, they have nice energy. Unfortunately, nothing about their skating is anything better than decent, especially their basic skating.

Review of the Original Dance from the 2005 World Figure Skating Championships

The judges ranking and their score for the OD are in parentheses.

1) Belbin/Agosto (2, 67.54) It is quite ironic that after spending all season complaining bout how much I dislike this program that I am ranking it first at worlds. But I feel they were the clear winners of the OD. They attacked this program and nailed everything. I got a good laugh at the British Eurosport's commentators trying to find something about this performance to criticize and coming up with 'Their arms weren't always in perfect unison,' because if that is the biggest problem with any program, it was obviously skated fabulously. The Charleston and quickstep were arguably the best of the night, and their foxtrot was almost up to the level it was four seasons ago. The choreography still is not very good, but their performance overcame that and made you forget about the it.

2) Navka/Kostomarov (1, 68.67) This is by no means a bad program, but it is also not a great program. Both the quickstep and foxtrot were done well, but not amazingly so. Still, the transitions are 1000% better than they were a season ago, making this actually looks somewhat like a dance program, instead of a pairs program with dance elements. And how can one not give them points for their extremely original musical selection of "Sing Sing Sing"? But as neither the difficulty level nor the interpretation was up to the level of Belbin/Agosto's, they deserved to place second.

3) Chait/Sakhnovski (5, 61.19) After placing 3rd at the GPF in the OD, I was crossing my fingers that their placement would be the same here. Unfortunately, the judges failed me. They, unlike the teams directly below them, had great interpretation of the rhythms and skated without any mistakes. And their energy level, as always, was ridiculously high. Plus, their skating skills, while not quite as good as the skating skills of the very best in the world, have improved so much that they should challenge those other teams.

4) Denkova/Staviski (4, 62.79) Awkward OD interpretation, but thy did skate all out. Their skating skills - and the fact that they too did not mess up, held them above the other teams here. Still, this OD is very forgettable.

5) Delobel/Schoenfelder (6, 60.25) Had Isabelle not made a small mistake on the sbs footwork sequence, they would have been challenging the top teams. Unfortunately, she did. Isabelle has nice interpretation, and even Olivier seems less lifeless than usual. Plus, the choreography is superb. The only other problem is that they are slightly off-beat for part of the foxtrot.

6) Grushina/Goncharov (3, 63.17) This program has many of they same weaknesses as B/A's does, which should not be a surprise, considering it is basically the same program. (Morozov's creativity or lack there of has sunk to a new low for "his" programs for G/G this season.) But unfortunately for them, they do not have B/A's technical strengths and charisma. Elena is lovely as always; Ruslan is dull as always. And I'm still waiting for them to finish their sbs footwork. Somebody needs to go out and push them during any footwork sequence.

7) Domnina/Shabalin (7, 58.86) These two probably had the best foxtrot interpretation of the season. It was graceful, musical, and truly brought the classical foxtrot to the ice. They even made their dance spin seem foxtrot-y. The sbs footwork didn't seem very powerful, and their twizzles, while miles better than many of the other team's, were a bit shaky. The quickstep was okay.

8) Dubreuil/Lauzon (8,58.30) Argh. The foxtrot and quickstep sections were extremely well-interpreted and the whole dance was extremely cohesive for a combination OD. But the sbs footwork was a complete and utter disaster. It got messed up about 1/3 of the way through, and they never quite got it back on track. There was a little to much of time spent not touching each other. And their Charleston was a bit awkward in places. Plus, why are they miming holding umbrellas? Isn't the whole point of "Singin' in the Rain" that one is singing in the rain, and not covered by umbrellas?

9) Faiella/Scali (9, 56.13) Their stroking has improved dramatically. Their twizzles still aren't very good. And they didn't really seem to truly get either rhythm, especially the quickstep. But technically, it was a strong program, and they had good energy as always,

10) Wing/Lowe (10, 52.52) They start off with a nice, although slightly dull, foxtrot. And then they transition into a nice, but slightly dull Charleston. I normally really like this team, but this performance seemed to lack energy. They don't have the technical content of the teams above them.

11) Fraser/Lukanin (13, 48.82) Their speed and polished has dramatically improved. Very nice foxtrot expression. They spend a little too much time apart. They had nice musicality too.

12) Kerr/Kerr (11, 50.71) There's still a fairly sizable gap between her skills and his, although he has improved. They have nice foxtrot expression. Theirs twizzles in the sbs footwork was very messy towards the end. Their quickstep was fine, but not quite as good as the foxtrot.

13) Gregory/Petukhov (12, 50.22) I got the advice to only watch him, not her, and I enjoyed them much more than usual. Interpret that as you want. Of course, then I missed the mistake she made on the twizzles during the sbs footwork, which also lacked flow. Decent Charleston expression. Too much stroking in foxtrot section.

14) Kulikova/Novikov (14, 48.72) She did best with the quickstep, while he shone in the foxtrot. Second quickstep had very little traditional quickstep character. They had a slightly messy quality overall.

I did not rank the rest of the teams.

Hoffman/Elek (17, 45.34) They start with a foxtrot, which was absolutely lovely and really captured the rhythm. The quickstep was very good too, but did not quite work as well as the foxtrot. And somebody needs to teach Atilla to twizzle, because I'm sick of him messing those up, as he did on the sbs footwork. And then he had trouble lifting Nora on the final lift, although a portion of that can probably be blamed on her 472346 pound dress. But overall, this was a very nice OD.

Gudina/Beletski (18, 42.85) They start off with an enthusiastic Charleston. But the foxtrot was dull, with little difficulty. And unfortunately they could not pick up the energy level with the final quickstep section, to Dancing Fool of all songs.

Watanabe/Kido (15, 46.57) A very good and in-character quickstep. Diagonal footwork could flow better. Their foxtrot was good, but not quite as in character as the quickstep. He has some trouble with the last lift.

Grebenkina/Azronjan (16, 46.02) Great energy, and their movements are very dance-y and fit the quickstep well. Their foxtrot is to extremely odd music - just a rhythm and no melody. But they end with another well-done quickstep section.

Beier/Beier (20, 41.66) Very cute and charming, with a good ballroom interpretation of the rhythms.

Kauc/Zych (22, 40.92) Fabulous foxtrot expression. Twizzles during sbs footwork were messy. Basic skating is very good. This program lacked the falls that their programs usually have, but it also lacked the energy and attack. Their quickstep expression is also very nice.

Pechalat/Bourzat (23, 40.71) They start with a very charming and well characterized Charleston. But she takes a bad fall during the sbs footwork. Their musicality in the foxtrot was good, but the choreography wasn't very ballroom. They fixed that during a great quickstep section.

Yang/Gao (19, 42.67) Decent foxtrot. She hits a lovely position during the lift. She's very charming. Charleston is nice too. He looks to have trouble rotating the final lift.

Golovina/Voika (21, 41.57) They start with movements that seem to exaggerated for the more subtle foxtrot rhythm. But they still have good musicality and energy. Decent quickstep, but again the movements don't fit the rhythm very well.

Munana/Munana (25, 36.31) As sick as I am of Chicago ODs, this one was great. Both rhythms, especially the Charleston, were interpreted fabulously. Both skaters sparkled. They clearly do not have the technical ability of the top teams, but if they can ad technical content in the future, they most definitely will be contenders.

Akimova/Shakalov (29, 31.35) Very polished, but little else going for them. He tripped on the sbs footwork. Diagonal footwork is . Their musicality is pretty good.

Aureli/Vaturi (24, 38.66) They start off with a lot of dancing in place. They have somewhat poor ice coverage on the sbs steps. But they have a good understanding of both the quickstep and foxtrot. Unfortunately, they really lack in technical content.

Haunstetter/Hoenlein (27. 33.00) Chicago. Again. But they have a very good Charleston, and his foot position during the lift was fabulous. Ugly and out-of-sync twizzles. The rest of the sbs wasn't much better. They looked like they were skating two different programs during the sbs steps. He is terrific.

Buck/Nelson-Bond (28, 32.85) Good Charleston expression. Pretty good speed through diagonal footwork. She hits great positions in their lifts. Their weakness seems to be basic skating. They also had unison trouble on the sbs footwork.

Keller/Keller (26, 33.23) Really weird Charleston music. Decent musicality. Their program is very empty. They also lacked energy. Their quickstep expression was the best of the three rhythms.

Galcheniuk/Krupen (30, 28.14) Most of their skating is decent. Their programs aren't empty, and their musical interpretation is okay. Plus, they have nice energy. Unfortunately, nothing about their skating is anything better than decent, especially their basic skating.

Home Made Wine Making - Some Things You Might Not Know

As wine has become more popular in the United States and growing steadily every day, there has been an increase also in the making of wine for personal consumption.

Wine making supplies have become readily available and producing wine at home allows the wine lovers to be able to stock their wine racks and cellars with their own product. Of course there have been many a bad drop of red and white wine made at home but as the hobby has now more followers, the recipes, supplies, equipment and utensils are much improved.

The winemaking kits have helped the process of making wine at home easier and so more and more are taking up this fascinating pastime. There is quite a band of people indulging in homemade wine making and exchanging recipes and tips to improve their batches. How we like our wine is a very personal thing. What one person likes another may think is not worth drinking. The wine making kits for homemade wine making help to keep the results of a batch more consistent and so more people will enjoy the same wine.

Using Homemade Wine To Create Your Family Tradition If you have started your own homemade wine making then why not start your very own family traditions by making a special wine for those family celebrations. Think of how it will be when you have a special wine for an anniversary, birthday, Thanksgiving, Christmas, the birth of a child. There are many times when your family and friends will appreciate your wine. Preparing your vintage can be timed for these special occasions as you will know exactly when to bottle and when the wine will be ready to be opened because the homemade wine making kit will have all the instructions you need.

With a wine making kit you get the juice concentrate and so you can prepare the exact type of wine that is preferred for each occasion. There are wine label kits so you can label your wine too with your own brand.

Your Appreciation Of Wine Making Will Deepen

As with most things, the more you learn about a subject the more you appreciate the complexities of that subject. This applies to wine making too. Homemade wine making will allow you to learn about the process of making wine and why it is a lifelong passion of the professional wine maker.

When you do purchase a bottle of wine from the local bottle shop, no longer will you just select that bottle you are used to, you will read labels more carefully and understand more when it says about the peppery, fruity, robust, rounded, soft and many other descriptions of the wine. No more will you just pick the bottle from the shelf, pay for it, take it home and drink it. You will be a wine expert and will compare those bought wines with your own and you may be surprised at how much you prefer your own vintage.

You Will Also Reap The Financial Benefits

The wine connoisseurs will have you believe that the best wines are the most expensive but this is not always the case as a few 'masked tests' have revealed. But generally speaking the more expensive the wine, the better the taste. That doesn't mean to say that your homemade wine making cannot produce some excellent tasting wines. Your initial outlay for your homemade wine making kit will cost you a few dollars, but once set up you only need to purchase the ingredients to make new batches.

A wine making kit contains the following

Complete Winemaking Equipment Kit Includes primary fermenter with cover, and glass secondary fermenter, hydrometer, stopper and fermentation lock, carboy handle,

Autosiphon and siphon tubing, bottlefiller, sterilizer, brushes, corker, corks and reference book.

Recommended additional equipment not included, Stirring spoon and degasser.This kit comes in three, five or six gallon sizes.

The Ingredients Kit

This kit includes all basic ingredients needed for Fruitwine, or conventional winemaking. Consists of Acid Testing Kit, Yeast, Acid Blend, Yeast Nutrient, Campden Tablets, Bentonite, Pectic Enzyme and Tannin.

Complete Winemaking Equipment Kit and the Winemaking Ingredients Kit will cost you between $120 and $140, so that would be your initial outlay and the ingredients kit will cost approximately less that $20. So your outlay for the next batches will be around the $20.

So you can see over a relatively short period of time you will be in front financially. Homemade wine making, more that just a hobby, something you will get passionate about and really enjoy doing. Your friends and family will really appreciate your passion too. It is a wonderful learning experience homemade wine making.

HomeMade Wine Making