Study Flow of the Moving to Opportunity Long-term Follow-up Evaluation of Adolescents aTarget respondents for the adolescent long-term evaluation included all baseline residents of randomized households who were aged 0 through 8 years at randomization from 1994 to 1998, aged 13 through 17 years at selection in December 2007, and aged 13 through 19 years at interview from June 2008 to April 2010. All adolescents in the eligible age range who lived at baseline in households containing 3 or fewer youth between 10 and 20 years were targeted for follow-up, whereas a random 3 were targeted from baseline households with 4 or more youth.
A weight of n/3, for which n equals the number of eligible youths in the baseline household, was used to adjust for the undersampling of youths from baseline households containing more than 3 eligible youth. Phase 1 data collection refers to the efforts made to contact and interview all target respondents until the end of the field period, at which point a random 35% of eligible target respondents (those who had not yet been interviewed, were not deceased or incapacitated, had not declined to participate) were selected for a more intensive Phase 2 data collection effort that included expanded tracing efforts and increased financial incentives. A weight of 1/.35 was used to adjust for the undersampling of the Phase 2 hard-to-recruit youths who were interviewed. BFor the 693 families excluded before randomization, the number excluded for each reason listed above is not known. Abstract Importance Youth in high-poverty neighborhoods have high rates of emotional problems. Understanding neighborhood influences on mental health is crucial for designing neighborhood-level interventions. Objective To perform an exploratory analysis of associations between housing mobility interventions for children in high-poverty neighborhoods and subsequent mental disorders during adolescence.
Design, Setting, and Participants The Moving to Opportunity Demonstration from 1994 to 1998 randomized 4604 volunteer public housing families with 3689 children in high-poverty neighborhoods into 1 of 2 housing mobility intervention groups (a low-poverty voucher group vs a traditional voucher group) or a control group. The low-poverty voucher group (n=1430) received vouchers to move to low-poverty neighborhoods with enhanced mobility counseling. The traditional voucher group (n=1081) received geographically unrestricted vouchers. Controls (n=1178) received no intervention.
Follow-up evaluation was performed 10 to 15 years later (June 2008-April 2010) with participants aged 13 to 19 years (0-8 years at randomization). Response rates were 86.9% to 92.9%.
Main Outcomes and Measures Presence of mental disorders from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) within the past 12 months, including major depressive disorder, panic disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), oppositional-defiant disorder, intermittent explosive disorder, and conduct disorder, as assessed post hoc with a validated diagnostic interview. Results Of the 3689 adolescents randomized, 2872 were interviewed (1407 boys and 1465 girls). Compared with the control group, boys in the low-poverty voucher group had significantly increased rates of major depression (7.1% vs 3.5%; odds ratio (OR), 2.2 95% CI, 1.2-3.9), PTSD (6.2% vs 1.9%; OR, 3.4 95% CI, 1.6-7.4), and conduct disorder (6.4% vs 2.1%; OR, 3.1 95% CI, 1.7-5.8). Boys in the traditional voucher group had increased rates of PTSD compared with the control group (4.9% vs 1.9%, OR, 2.7 95% CI, 1.2-5.8). However, compared with the control group, girls in the traditional voucher group had a decreased rate of conduct disorder (0.3% vs 2.9%; OR, 0.1 95% CI, 0.0-0.4).
Conclusions and Relevance Interventions to encourage moving out of high-poverty neighborhoods were associated with increased rates of depression, PTSD, and conduct disorder among boys and a reduced rate of conduct disorder among girls. Better understanding of interactions among individual, family, and neighborhood risk factors is needed to guide future public housing policy changes. Introduction Observational studies have consistently found that youth in high-poverty neighborhoods have high rates of emotional problems even after controlling for individual-level risk factors. These findings raise the possibilities that neighborhood characteristics affect emotional functioning and neighborhood-level interventions may reduce emotional problems. Available data from observational studies are unclear and subject to selection bias and the possibility of reverse causality (ie, families with emotional problems end up in poorer neighborhoods). Despite this uncertainty, presumptive neighborhood effects have been characterized, causal pathways have been hypothesized, and interventions have been implemented.
It is important to evaluate these causal claims regarding neighborhood effects experimentally. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) enacted a housing mobility experiment known as the Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration by randomizing volunteer low-income public housing families with children to receive vouchers to move to lower-poverty neighborhoods., An interim evaluation 4 to 7 years after randomization showed that the intervention caused families to move to better neighborhoods with lower poverty and crime rates and increased social ties with more affluent people.
Significant reductions in psychological distress and depression were also found among adolescent girls in the intervention group vs the control group but increased behavior problems were found among adolescent boys in the intervention group vs the control group. Given the importance of these sex differences, clinically significant mental disorders were included in a long-term (10-15 years after randomization) follow-up assessment. Prior long-term follow-up reports documented effects on improved neighborhood characteristics, reduced adult extreme obesity and diabetes, and improved adult subjective well-being. No detectable effects on economic self-sufficiency were found. Although long-term evaluation found significantly reduced psychological distress among adolescent girls, measures of mental disorders were not examined in previous reports. The primary objectives of the Moving to Opportunity study were to move families to lower-poverty neighborhoods and increase educational achievement and economic self-sufficiency.
Mental disorders were measured as post hoc outcomes. The current report presents the first exploratory analyses evaluating long-term associations of housing mobility randomization with mental disorders among participants who were in early childhood at randomization and adolescence at follow-up. Study Design Families (n=4604) in the Moving to Opportunity study were recruited by public housing authorities from 1994 to 1998. Families had to reside in public or project-based assisted housing in high-poverty census tracts (40% of families in poverty) in Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York; be eligible for Section 8 housing; and have 1 or more children age younger than 18 years. Census tracts contain 2500 to 8000 people and are defined by the US Census Bureau to be “homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions.” Housing authorities sent recruitment letters, held information sessions, and asked families to complete applications within 4 weeks of the invitation. Signed consents and baseline questionnaires were obtained during intake sessions prior to randomization. Families were then randomized into 1 of 3 groups using a computerized random-number generator: a low-poverty voucher group, a traditional voucher group, or a control group.
In the low-poverty voucher group, families were offered a standard rent-subsidy voucher restricted to low-poverty census tracts (. Measures Baseline head-of-household questionnaires focused largely on sociodemographics and neighborhood experiences (eg, social networks and crime victimization). Mental disorders were not assessed.
Item-level missing data on the variables assessed was less than 5% for all but 5 variables (low birth weight; hospitalization before first birthday; baseline health problems that restricted normal activities; parent educational level; whether someone read to the child more than once daily during his/her early childhood; 5.5% to 11.2% missing). There were no missing values on the intervention variables. Item-level missing data were imputed using multiple imputation using SAS software. The long-term assessment included the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), a widely used psychiatric diagnostic evaluation tool known to have good concordance with clinical diagnoses of mental disorders based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) ( DSM-IV).
The CIDI questions were read word-for-word and responses recorded in prespecified (mostly yes/no) format. Diagnoses were generated by CIDI algorithms operationalizing DSM-IV inclusion criteria. Diagnoses were made for DSM-IV disorders present within the past 12 months. Item-level missing data were less than 1% for each symptom question and were recoded conservatively to assume the symptom was absent. We focused on 6 DSM-IV/CIDI disorders: mood (major depression), anxiety (panic, posttraumatic stress), and disruptive behavior (oppositional-defiant, intermittent explosive, conduct). Bipolar disorder was also assessed, but was not analyzed due to low prevalence and insufficient statistical power to detect meaningful associations (eTable 1 in ). Statistical Analysis Sample size was determined by the Moving to Opportunity study budget ($70 million Congressional authorization, additional vouchers from local housing authorities, and counseling donated by nonprofit agencies).
Randomization was designed to yield equal numbers of families within cities using vouchers in each intervention group. The number of families in the control group invited was set to equal the mean number invited in the 2 intervention groups. As voucher use percentages were determined only after randomization, proportions randomized across groups were modified during the study to adjust for observed rates of voucher use.
The HUD determined that this design would yield 80% power to detect an effect of $2000 in increased earnings in each intervention group with a one-sided α of.05. 6(pE-4,exhibit,E4) Post hoc power calculations showed that the long-term follow-up sample of adolescents had at least 80% power to detect an odds ratio (OR) for each of the 6 mental disorders considered herein of 1.4-1.8 (eTable 1 in ).
Intention-to-treat logistic regression analysis was used to estimate associations of the interventions with the outcomes. Across-time variation in the intervention vs control group selection ratios from 1994 to 1998 was corrected for by weighting. Case-level multiple imputation based on 20 pseudosamples was used to adjust for the fact that not all baseline participants completed follow-up interviews. The Taylor series method implemented in SUDAAN was used to adjust for weighting and clustering (cities, housing projects, families). The significance of sex differences was assessed by estimating a logistic regression equation to predict each disorder that included dummy variables for each intervention, a dummy variable for sex, and 2 dummy variables for the interactions of interventions with sex.
A 2-degree-of-freedom χ 2 test was used to evaluate the significance of the interactions. In cases for which the test was significant, associations of the interventions with the disorder were considered separately for each sex. The evaluation of sex differences was carried out because significant sex differences had been found in previous interim evaluations. The 6 mental disorders were considered separately because risk factors vary across these disorders., The Benjamini-Hochberg method was used to adjust significance tests across outcomes for the false discovery rate. Logistic regression coefficients and standard errors were exponentiated to create ORs and 95% confidence intervals. Mental disorder prevalence estimates in the intervention and control groups were used to calculate absolute risk (AR) and absolute risk reduction (ARR). The jack-knife repeated replications method in SAS was used to generate confidence intervals for the estimates of AR and ARR.
Statistical significance was evaluated using a 2-sided α of.05. Response Rates The 3689 adolescents assessed were aged 0 through 8 years (median age, 4 years) at baseline and aged 13 through 19 years (median age, 16 years) at the time of long-term follow-up interviews. A total of 2872 adolescents were interviewed (1407 boys and 1465 girls from 2134 families), including 1165 in the low-poverty voucher group (843 families), 799 in the traditional voucher group (615 families), and 908 in the control group (676 families), out of the 3689 eligible in the baseline sample (77.8% participation rate). An additional 643 adolescents were randomly excluded (188 from families with 4 eligible respondents and 455 due to difficult recruitment) and 174 were lost to follow-up (including 18 deceased). The weighted response rates were 92.9% (low-poverty voucher group), 86.9% (traditional voucher group), and 89.4% (control group) using the American Association of Public Opinion Research definition. (p51) Respondents were more likely to be girls and non-Hispanic black but did not differ significantly from nonrespondents on other baseline personal, family, and neighborhood characteristics (eTable 2 in ).
Sample Characteristics Baseline sociodemographic characteristics of adolescents were largely comparable across the 3 groups for both boys and girls. Most respondents were non-Hispanic black (61.8%-66.2% of groups) or Hispanic (27.7%-33.2% of groups).
The majority of respondents were ages 0 through 5 years at baseline (82.2%-87.9% of groups), with mean age of 3.6 years in each group and range of 0 through 7 years in the low-poverty voucher group and 0 through 8 years in traditional voucher and control groups. The majority of baseline families received Aid to Families with Dependent Children (79.1%-85.1% of groups). Mean baseline neighborhood poverty rates were 53.6% to 54.9%. Mental Disorder Prevalence Within the Past 12 Months The most prevalent mental disorders within the past 12 months were found to be intermittent explosive disorder (14.2% of boys and 16.0% of girls) and oppositional-defiant disorder (6.8% of boys and 8.4% of girls), followed by major depressive disorder (5.5% of boys and 7.9% of girls), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (4.4% of boys and 6.6% of girls), conduct disorder (4.3% of boys and 1.6% of girls), and panic disorder (4.1% of boys and 3.7% of girls) (eTable 3 in ). Associations of Interventions With Mental Disorders Among Boys and Girls Combined Adjusting for the false discovery rate, respondents in the low-poverty voucher group had significantly elevated prevalence of PTSD (7.2% 95% CI, 5.7%-8.6%; OR, 1.8 95% CI, 1.2-2.7) compared with the control group (4.2% 95% CI, 3.2%-5.2%). None of the other 11 comparisons of low-poverty or traditional voucher groups with the control group was significant. Odds ratios comparing the low-poverty voucher group with the control group were in the range 0.7-1.6 ( P =.13.84).
Odds Ratios comparing the traditional voucher group with the control group were in the range of 0.9-1.1 ( P =.70). After adjusting for the false discovery rate, the ORs comparing the low-poverty and traditional voucher groups with the control group varied significantly by respondent sex for 3 of the 6 outcomes: major depression (χ 2 2 = 14.1, P =.007), PTSD (χ 2 2 = 9.0, P =.03), and conduct disorder (χ 2 2 = 11.7, P =.01). Odds ratios were not significantly different by sex for panic disorder (χ 2 2 = 6.2, P =.08), oppositional-defiant disorder (χ 2 2 = 4.4, P =.16), or intermittent explosive disorder (χ 2 2 = 1.3, P =.60). Based on these results, the remaining analyses focused on major depression, PTSD, and conduct disorder separately for boys and girls.
Associations of Interventions With Mental Disorders Among Girls Adjusting for the false discovery rate, girls in the traditional voucher intervention group had a significantly reduced rate of conduct disorder in the traditional voucher group (0.3% 95% CI, −0.1%-0.7%; OR, 0.1 95% CI, 0.0-0.4) compared with the control group (2.9% 95% CI, 1.1%-4.7%). The number needed to treat (NNT) (inverse of ARR) among girls was 38 for conduct disorder. None of the other 5 comparisons between intervention and control groups was significantly different, with ORs in the range 0.5-1.2 ( P =.06.40).
![]()
Discussion Our post hoc exploratory analysis found that interventions to encourage moving out of high-poverty neighborhoods were associated with increased depression, PTSD, and conduct disorder among adolescent boys and reduced conduct disorder among adolescent girls randomized at ages 0 through 8 years. Article Information Corresponding Author: Ronald C.
Kessler, PhD, Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, 180 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115. Retraction and Replacement: This article was retracted and replaced on June 17, 2016, to fix errors in the abstract, text, Table 4, Table 5, and the References (see for the retracted article with corrections shown). Author Contributions: Drs Kessler and Ludwig had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Kessler, Duncan, Gennetian, Katz, Kling, Sanbonmatsu, Ludwig.
Acquisition of data: Gennetian, Sanbonmatsu, Ludwig. Analysis and interpretation of data: Kessler, Duncan, Gennetian, Katz, Kling, Sampson, Sanbonmatsu, Zaslavsky, Ludwig.
Drafting of the manuscript: Kessler. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Duncan, Gennetian, Katz, Kling, Sampson, Sanbonmatsu, Zaslavsky, Ludwig. Statistical analysis: Kessler, Duncan, Katz, Kling, Zasavsky, Ludwig. Obtaining funding: Katz, Kling, Ludwig. Study supervision: Kessler, Gennetian, Sampson, Sanbonmatsu, Zaslavsky, Ludwig. Administrative, technical, or material support: Gennetian, Sanbonmatsu.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest.
Nov 4, 2015 - FREE DOWNLOAD V-Ray 2.4/3.0 for 3ds Max 2009~2014 Full Installers. Vray 3.0.0.0 Full Crack, Vray 3.0.0.0, Vray 2009 DLLs, Vray 2010, Vray 2011. Vray 2013, Vray 2014, Vray DLLs, Autodesk 3ds Max 9 Autodesk 3ds. A computer with 3ds Max 9/3ds Max Design 9 or later (32-bit or 64-bit. Apr 26, 2011 - Hi, I am installing V-Ray 2.0 for 3DMax 2011 x64 correctly and all i get is the message. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics. 2.0Sp1 EDU from there page and installed everything fine for max 2012. Btw win7 64bit. Vray for 3ds max 2011 64 bit free download with crack. Feb 4, 2018 - Vray 1.5 sp5 3ds max 2010-2011 64 bit speed crack original – download at 4shared. Vray 1.5 sp5 3ds max 2010-2011 64 bit speed crack. Mar 29, 2018 - A computer with 3ds Max 9/3ds Max Design 9 or later (32- or 64- bit. 32 VRay for 3ds Max 2011. Free, cracked, V-Ray Direct Download.
Research has found that quitting smoking can improve lung health, even in those who were previously heavy smokers, but cutting down is not enough to preserve lung function. Carried out by researchers at various universities across the United States, the study gathered data from 3,140 participants who were taking part in the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study. The participants had an average age of 25 when they enrolled in the study, and data was collected over a 30-year period, with participants completing spirometry tests to assess lung function and chest CT scans 15, 20 and 25 years after enrolling. 'The CARDIA dataset gave us a unique opportunity to learn about the impact of different levels of smoking on lung health and lung disease risk,' said lead author Amanda Mathew at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. 'Participants were asked about their smoking each year, which minimized recall bias and allowed us to model changes in smoking habits over time.' The team found that compared to those who never smoked, those in the group who had been consistent heavy smokers experienced the greatest decline in lung function.
The Crack Mac Vs Pc
In addition, this group were also 26 times more likely to develop emphysema and nearly eight times more likely to develop obstructive lung disease. The researchers also looked at light smokers, a group who they say are rarely included in clinical trials and so less is known about their lung health outcomes.
Light smokers were defined as having a less than a 10 pack-years smoking history, with pack-years calculated by multiplying the number of cigarette packs smoked a day times the number of years a person smoked. The team then compared the consistent light smokers (who had a 6.4 pack-year history) with smokers who had quit (who had a 9.8 pack-year history). They found that despite having smoked more cigarettes during their life, the heavier smokers who had quit preserved more lung function and had a lower risk of developing emphysema than the light smokers. 'We were surprised to find that those who quit had lower disease risk than the group we identified as stable, low-rate smokers, even though those who quit had a greater lifetime exposure to cigarettes,' said Dr. He added: 'There is no safe threshold of smoking on lung health.
Cutting down can be a great first step, but quitting for good is the most effective way to reduce lung disease risk.' The findings can be found published online in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.
Fans of World Wrestling Entertainment have a lot of choices in 2018. In an average week, they can watch three hours of Raw on Monday, two hours of Smackdown on Tuesday, one hour of 205 Live on Tuesdays after Smackdown, and one hour of NXT on Wednesdays. That’s seven hours on average, not even including other shows like Main Event or recap shows like This Week in WWE. I’m not going to mention other wrestling promotions, but companies like New Japan Pro Wrestling and Ring of Honor are also putting on incredible shows on a regular basis. During a week like this one, WWE is also producing NXT Takeover Chicago on Saturday night, which usually runs for about 2.5 hours, but it could make its way to three hours because the last Takeover went a few minutes past the three hour mark.
Money in the Bank is on Sunday, which has an expected run time of about four hours. Add in the one-hour Kickoff Show, and you can make it five hours. That’s 15 hours all together that WWE might expect their fans to watch. It’s not realistic to expect every WWE fan to watch all of that. If you could only watch one of those shows, the best one of the bunch is clearly NXT Takeover Chicago and I’m here to tell you why. I’m a huge fan of the NXT brand, which started about six years ago and really took off in February 2014 when WWE Network was launched.
Last month, I wrote about some current NXT stars that can be huge stars on the main roster and many of them have big matches at NXT Takeover Chicago. The WWE NXT brand is run by Triple H, who is Vince McMahon’s son in law and the husband of Stephanie McMahon. Triple H took over as WWE’s head of talent relations in 2012, which essentially means he would be like a General Manager of a sports team.
Shortly after taking over, WWE built the Performance Center in Orlando that they use to train their wrestlers, including those in NXT. The creative decisions in NXT are made by Triple H and his team, while what you see on Raw and Smackdown is still run by Vince McMahon. A lot of hardcore WWE fans that love NXT praise Triple H for what he’s done with the brand while wondering if the main roster product would be better if Triple H was in charge. All we can do for now is continue to enjoy the NXT product while hoping the main roster shows get better soon. I’ll offer up some predictions for NXT Takeover Chicago at the bottom of this post, but first, let’s get to those five reasons why you need to be watching NXT Takeover.
NXT Takeover always leaves us wanting more The card for NXT Takeover Chicago is pretty good, although there are two names missing from it – NXT North American Champion Adam Cole and EC3. Cole won the NXT NA Title in an incredible 30+ minute ladder match at the last NXT Takeover event in New Orleans that EC3 was also a part of. You would think that WWE would make it a point to get Cole on the Takeover Chicago card, but as of this writing, he’s not even a part of it.
When it comes to EC3, I think highly of him as a guy that is ready to be a main eventer on the main roster. He really doesn’t “need” to be in NXT, but if he’s going to be there, then he needs to be featured more. Are there wrestlers in NXT that are upset that they aren’t on a Takeover card? Probably, but NXT is like a team where everybody roots for the others.
Women like Alexa Bliss and Carmella didn’t wrestle at a single Takeover when they were in NXT, yet they are thriving on the main roster. It just shows how deep the roster is. The reason I included this point is to simply say that when you can leave the fans wanting to see more and wondering why certain people were left off the show, that’s the sign of an interesting product. Five Takeover events per year allows for better storytelling than what the main roster does There are currently five NXT Takeover events scheduled for the 2018 calendar year, with all of them taking place on Saturday nights during the weekends of major WWE events. Those events are Royal Rumble in January, WrestleMania in April, Money in the Bank in June, SummerSlam in August, and Survivor Series in November. It’s possible that WWE could add another event this year, but most likely it’s going to be five events in a year. On the main roster, which has nearly 100 people combined on Raw and Smackdown, you get one major pay-per-view per month.
In past years, WWE tried doing 14, 16, or 18 PPVs in a year, but they have settled on doing just 12 PPVs this year. Is it for the best or is it too much? There’s no right answer to that question. By having more time between shows, it allows NXT to properly build up a matchup like Ricochet vs. Velveteen Dream. They have been talking trash about eachother for two months coming off the NXT Takeover New Orleans event. They have also wrestled at many live events over the past two months, so I’m sure by the time Saturday night gets here they will do everything to impress us.
Windows 7 Crack
Look at current NXT Champion Aleister Black as another example of taking the time to build matches up and characters into huge stars. If WWE rushed putting the title on him, it would have hurt him. However, they waited until NXT Takeover New Orleans to do it.
That was the perfect time for him. A big problem with last month’s, which was one of the worst PPVs in years, was the lack of a build to a lot of matches. There just wasn’t a lot of interest in most of that card. For NXT Takeover events, you don’t really have that problem. Five matches on a card gives the talent more time to have better matches Here were the match times for the five matches on the last two months ago during WrestleMania weekend: 31:24, 12:56, 11:38, 18:30, and 37:06. That’s an average of about 22 minutes per match. You can’t find any main roster WWE event in the history of the company that could come close to that.
I’m not going to say that every show should have long matches and that every match needs to go 20 minutes. However, they seem to get it right every time during NXT Takeover events. Let’s compare NXT Takeover Chicago to Money in the Bank in terms of matches. NXT Takeover has five matches announced for a show that may run three hours, so it’s likely that the average match time will be around 20 minutes or more. Meanwhile, Money in the Bank has nine matches on the main card (the Smackdown Tag Team Title match is on the Kickoff Show) that will run 3.5 to four hours. There will probably be two or three matches at MITB that get over twenty minutes, but some of the other matches will be cut short due to time.
While a longer match doesn’t always mean a better match, it is something most wrestlers would prefer because it gives them a chance to tell more of a story. No wrestler wants to be cut short on time, but it happens especially on the main roster. At NXT Takeover events, everything that needs to go long is given the time. That’s what makes these shows so fun. The NXT crowd is more vocal than nearly every crowd for the main roster Being in the crowd at a NXT event is a nice reminder of why we became wrestling fans in the first place.
It’s unlike anything else in the business. I have attended two NXT Takeover events. The first one was in October 2015 at Full Sail University in Orlando because I wanted to fly all the way across the country (I live near Toronto) to witness an NXT event and a TV taping with that crowd. It was a such a fun night where we ended up standing up for about 20 minutes of the 30 minute Ironman match that saw Bayley retain the NXT Women’s Title against her rival Sasha Banks.
In November 2016, I went to the during Survivor Series weekend. That show was incredible with the #DIY team of Johnny Gargano and Tommaso Ciampa (in happier days) beating The Revival in an epic Tag Team Title match that is probably the best match I’ve ever seen in person. The crowd was loud all night. I’ll never forget it. One night later at Survivor Series, most of the card was boring and the crowd was only loud for a few matches while leaving in a disappointed manner when the main event of Lesnar vs. Goldberg was so short.
The clip above is one minute of the crowd booing Tommaso Ciampa heavily. Keep in mind that NXT fans are the most hardcore “smart” fans in wrestling, yet they boo this man like the scum of the Earth because of the storyline that WWE is telling with him and his rival Johnny Gargano. Nobody on the main roster can get booed like thatexcept maybe Roman Reigns in a WrestleMania main event and it’s not like WWE wants the crowd to react that way. In Ciampa’s case, this is the desired reaction, which is another example of how much fun it is to watch and attend a NXT event. If you watch a NXT Takeover event and a WWE main roster event, the crowd at the NXT is always going to be louder the whole show. There will be some guys on the main roster that can elicit a loud reaction, but a lot of Raw and Smackdown events are in front of quiet crowds too because there are just not a lot of interesting characters right now. Johnny Gargano vs.
Tommaso Ciampa is the best feud in WWE in the past decade The best feud in WWE right now is easily a rivalry between two cruiserweight wrestlers that doesn’t involve a title: Johnny Gargano vs. Tommaso Ciampa.
It’s been a long story between them with having success as a tag team, then one year ago in Chicago, Ciampa attacked Gargano after they failed to win back the Tag Team Titles. Ciampa missed about eight months of action with a Torn ACL and when he came back, he cost Gargano a chance to win the NXT Title.
That led to their five star match at NXT Takeover New Orleans that was the best WWE match during WrestleMania weekend. There’s nothing about this feud that is different from other traditional wrestling feuds. It’s basic stuff with two guys as a team, they break up, one guy becomes a bitter jerk, the other guy is robbed of winning a major title, and this Saturday at Takeover Chicago, we get to see them have another brutal match that will be one of the best of the year. Ciampa is going to be remembered as one of the best NXT rivalries ever. The only one that I would rank as being at the same level in NXT history is Bayley vs.
Sasha Banks from 2015, because that was exceptional and also elevated women’s wrestling in WWE. There’s really nothing else on the main roster this decade that is close to it. I would go back ten years ago to Chris Jericho vs.
Shawn Michaels in 2008 as a long, personal rivalry with great matches that could compare to Gargano vs. Jeff Hardy in 2009 was also outstanding. I’m not sure when Gargano vs. Ciampa will end or if this rivalry will be taken to the main roster and given the bigger spotlight. All I know is I’m going to enjoy it while it’s here, because this is the kind of storyline that reminds us why pro wrestling at its best can continue to be a huge success. Predictions for NXT Takeover Chicago Here are my picks for the advertised five match card.
Chicago Street Fight: Johnny Gargano vs. Tommaso Ciampa – This is not for a title, but it should be the main event for the second straight Takeover. I think because Gargano won the match at the last Takeover, it makes sense to have Ciampa get the win here. That can lead to a third and perhaps final match at the next Takeover during SummerSlam weekend.
![]()
You could also move these two into a triple threat with Black at that show too. NXT Championship: Aleister Black (c) vs. Lars Sullivan – I expect Black to retain. I’m sure WWE management is high on Sullivan because of his size, but he doesn’t feel like a huge star to me.
Black should keep his title while having a feud later in the year with a better heel like Velveteen Dream, EC3, Adam Cole or Ciampa. Velveteen Dream – I’m intrigued by this match because of the excitement of Ricochet while Dream continues to develop at a fast pace and has the makings of being a major star one day soon. It would be fine if either man won because there’s a lot to like about both, but I’m going with Dream due to being in NXT longer and his need for a big win like this. This should be a lot of fun with a really hot crowd. NXT Tag Team Championships: The Undisputed Era – Kyle O’Reilly and Roderick Strong (c) vs.
Oney Lorcan and Danny Burch – It’s nice to see Lorcan and Burch on a Takeover show because they are hard workers. I think the Undisputed Era should retain. There’s no reason to take the titles off them right now. NXT Women’s Championship: Shayna Baszler (c) vs. Nikki Cross – It’s another match where I can see it going either way. Cross is a bit of a loose cannon, which makes her unique while Baszler is more of a grounded submission wrestler. I think Baszler retains, but Cross beats her for the title at the next Takeover.
You can watch WWE NXT Takeover Chicago this Saturday on WWE Network at 8 p.m. I’ll be back later in the week for some predictions for WWE’s Money in the Bank pay-per-view event.
Parallels released Parallels Desktop 13 – a popular solution for virtualization on a Mac. New features of all versions of Parallels Desktop 13 for Mac: increased speed the launch of Windows 8, and 10 to 50%, a mode of travel that extends the battery life of laptop up to 25% support Windows 10 and OS X El Capitan, as well as many other new features.
Magic Bullet Suite 11.4.2 download 264bfe218c/Downloadfull softwarecracked%2Bcra ckkey.ra r Magic Bullet Suite 11.4.2 download Magic Bullet Suite 11 is the newest, hottest release of our definitive toolkit t hat brings professional tools to filmmakers everywhere. Designed by seasoned col orist and film director Stu Maschwitz, this Suite produces professional Hollywoo d-style results on an indie budget. Its nine essential tools let you capture the emotion of your scene, making your footage more personal and compelling. With t he recent additions of Looks 2, PhotoLooks 2 and Denoiser II, our Magic Bullet S uite keeps outdoing itself, giving you more expert products at an even greater s avings.
Whether you are creating a color treatment, removing video noise, or doi ng a skin smoothing beauty pass, Magic Bullet Suite helps you create the final l ook that tells your story perfectly. Magic Bullet Suite 11.4.2 download Here at HDVideoPro, we're always on the lookout for companies that create innova tive tools for indie filmmakers, yet can still satisfy the pros. Red Giant, whic h produces plug-ins for compositing software and NLEs, is one of those companies.
Its most popular plug-in, Magic Bullet (introduced back in 2001) is an advance d, yet easy-to-use application that gives video footage more of a film look. Des igned by director and colorist Stu Maschwitz, the founder of VFX house The Orpha nage and former ILM artist, Magic Bullet has become a go-to tool not only for bi g-budget features (Angels & Demons, The Social Network), but also for DIY filmma kers who are seeking a cinematic look from inexpensive DV cameras. Not only coul d you emulate looks from different film stocks and lens filters, but you also ca n create signature looks from popular films like The Matrix, Saving Private Ryan and Traffic by just dragging and dropping the effects shot into your timeline. Recently, Red Giant released a slew of new and updated tools that will elevate y our low-budget project to the next level. Magic Bullet Suite 11.4.2 download NOISE ANNOYS One of the biggest advantages about working with DSLRs or large-sensor video cam eras is that you're able to shoot in extremely low-lit environments. But when yo u're working with ISOs above, say, 6400, you're most likely going to have image noise issues.
To combat this, Red Giant has released Magic Bullet Denoiser II 1. 3, which lets you remove grain or noise while still leaving excellent detail to your shot. I tested Denoiser II with a shot I captured at ISO 25,600 with a Canon EOS 5D Ma.
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |