All posts by medical

Neuroscience

Neuroscience Can Help Us Understand Why Free Will Is Real – Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence

Evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne seems obsessed with denying free will. In a recent post on his blog, Why Evolution Is True, he supported the claim of theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder that we do not have free will:

If youve read this site, youll know that my own views are pretty much the same as hers, at least about free will. We dont have it, and the fundamental indeterminacy of quantum mechanics doesnt give it to us either.

Hossenfelder doesnt pull any punches:

This means in a nutshell that the whole story of the universe in every single detail was determined already at the big bang. We are just watching it play out.

QED!

Both Coyne and Hossenfelder are atheists, materialists, and deterministsa sort of intellectual dark triadand their beliefs are scientifically and logically uninformed. They use denial of free will to prop up their materialist and determinist irreligion. It is not science; it is an ideological project, without a shred of science or logic to back it up.

There are three lines of evidence supporting the reality of free will: Neuroscience, physics and philosophy all point to the fact that free will is real. In this post, Ill discuss the neuroscience. But first, we must start by understanding what free will is. Erroneous definition of free will is at the root of many mistakes inherent in denying it.

It turns out that free will is rather hard to define rigorously, if taken all by itself. Many have tried. Definitions such as choice that is uncaused, choice that is an inclination that originates wholly within an organism, and choice that entails the existence of alternative possibilities have been proposed. Each is inadequate to the situation.

The definition of free will really depends on the definition of will. Will is a subset of appetite (an Aristotelian term), which means an inclination to act. There are two kinds of appetitesensitive appetite and rational appetite. Sensitive appetites are appetites that arise from concrete perceptions and imagination. I perceive a piece of cake, and I imagine how wonderful it would taste, so (if I am impulsive) I eat it.

Rational appetite is inclination to act based on reason, not on perceptions or imagination. Suppose, for example, that I am on a diet. My decision about whether to eat a piece of cake because of its appearance and how I imagine it will taste is fundamentally different from my decision about whether I will break my diet in order to do so. One inclinationmy sensitive appetiteis based on concrete perception. The other inclinationto follow my dietis based on abstract reason.

Only abstract reason/rational appetite is the will part of free will. Sensitive appetite is not part of the willit is a passion based wholly on material factorsmy brain chemistry, etc. Sensitive appetite is not freethis kind of appetite is indeed dictated by my molecules and neurotransmitters. I can condition it and override it but in itself, it is wholly material and subject to the laws of nature.

My willmy rational appetiteis an immaterial power of my mind. My will can be influenced by my passions but it is inherently free of material determinism of any kind. For example, my decision whether or not to eat that piece of cake is the result of the struggle between my material passions and my immaterial willbetween my sensitive and my rational appetite. Sometimes my passion wins. Sometimes my reasonmy willwins.

Now that we have a satisfactory definition of will, what do we mean by free will? Philosopher and theologian Thomas Aquinas gave the best answer: My free will is inclination based on abstract reasoning that arises wholly from me. Nothing other than me determines my will. I determine my will and my will is an immaterial power of my soul. In this specific sense, I have free will.

Now lets get to the neuroscience. Neuroscience has a lot to contribute to the debate over free will and all of it supports the reality of free will. There isnt a shred of neuroscientific evidence that contradicts the reality of free will.

Two major types of experiments address the question of free will:

The first is the experiments of Benjamin Libet, a mid- to late 20th century neuroscientist who studied the precise timing of electrical activity in the brain and conscious decisions to do simple tasks such pushing a button. Libet found that we have pre-conscious impulses characterized by spikes in brain waves that precede conscious decisions by about a half-second. But he also found that these pre-conscious impulses (which are not freely generated) are merely temptations. We retain the power to accept or reject them, and acceptance or rejection of these temptations is not accompanied by brain waves. Libet called this state free wont: We are bombarded by temptations that are beyond our immediate control but we have the immaterial freedom to accept or reject them. He noted the congruence between his experimental results and the traditional Jewish and Christian understanding of sin. We are tempted involuntarily but we always have freedom to comply with or reject temptation.

The second set of experiments is, in my view, even more compelling. They derive from the work of Wilder Penfield, the pioneer in the neurosurgery of epilepsy in the mid-20th century. Penfield performed over a thousand awake brain operations on patients with epilepsy. He stimulated their brains and the recorded the effect of stimulation on these awake patients. He found that he was able to stimulate practically any concrete mental phenomenonmovement of limbs, perceptions of light or smell or tactile sensations, emotions, memoriesbut he was never able to stimulate abstract thought or free will. In his memoir, Mystery of the Mind, he concluded that abstract thought and free will (which he called the mind as distinct from automatic responses like perceptions, movements, or emotions) did not originate in the brain, but were immaterial powers of the soul. He began his career as a strict materialist but ended his career as a convinced dualist.

He also noted a remarkable fact: there are no intellectual seizures, and by implication, no seizures that invoke free will. There are no calculus seizures, no logic seizures, no seizures that make the patients think abstractly or will (apparently) freely. There are no seizures that make you choose to be a Republican or a Democrat, no seizures that make you Christian or Jewish, no seizures that make you apply certain kinds of logic to a problem rather than another kind of logic. This is remarkable: if the will is merely the product of brain activity, at least some seizures should evoke will. They never do. Many seizures do feature complex manifestations (theyre called complex partial seizures), but these complex seizures always involve concrete thoughts and actions perceptions, emotions, and stereotypic movements. There are no seizures that invoke abstract thought or abstract decisionsthere are no free will seizures.

This remains true to this day. There are no reports in the medical literaturedespite literally billons of seizures suffered by patients in the modern eraof any seizure that replicates free will. This remarkable factliterally based on billions of data pointsclearly shows that the will is not determined by the material state of the brain. If the will were determined by neural activity, the willabstract choice based on reasonwould at least occasionally be replicated by seizures. It never is.

Coyne, Hossenfelder and other free will deniers are ignorant of the mountain of neuroscience evidence confirming free will. They are also ignorant of the philosophical reasoning supporting free will and of the evidence in physics that refutes determinism (but these are both subjects for another post).

If Dr. Coyne reads this far in this post, I challenge him: If free will is determined by brain states, show us the medical or neuroscience evidence that free will is ever evoked by seizure or by neurosurgical stimulation of the brain. In other words, Dr. Coyne, show me the neuroscience behind your bizarre denial of free will.

NeurosurgeonMichael Egnorhas written a fair bit on free will forMind Matters News.Here are some selections to consider:

No free will meansno justice:Free will is the cornerstone of all human rights and the cornerstone of our Constitutional rights. The denial of free will is, literally, the denial of human freedom. Without free will, we are livestock, without the presumption of innocence, without actual innocence, and without rights. A justice system that has no respect for free willa justice system in which human choices are diseases is a system of livestock management applied to homo sapiens.

Also:

Jerry Coyne just cant give updenying free will.Coynes denial of free will, based on determinism, is science denial and junk metaphysics

How Libets free will researchis misrepresented:Sometimes, says Michael Egnor, misrepresentation may be deliberate because Libets work doesnt support a materialist perspective.

Doesalien hand syndromeshow that we dont really have free will? One womans left hand seemed to have a mind of its own. Did it?

and

Does brain stimulation researchchallenge free will?If we can be forced to want something, is the will still free?

Read the original post:
Neuroscience Can Help Us Understand Why Free Will Is Real - Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence

Neuroscience

Why We Lie, And The Neuroscience Behind It – Forbes

Shutterstock

Im fine.

Of course I love you.

Ill call you.

No, you dont look fat in those jeans.

We are liars.

All of us.

We lie to save face, to avoid hurting other peoples feelings, to impress others, to shirk responsibility, to hide misdeeds, as a social lubricant, to prevent conflict, to get out of work, and many more reasons.

And we lie a lot.

Deception costs businesses and government billions, ruins relationships, undermines what we care about and even takes lives. The more white matter (see my blog The Truth About How Your Brain Gets Smarter)or some might even say the more intelligent the neocortexthe greater potential a person has to lie.

Bella DePaulo, Ph.D., a psychologist at the University of Virginia, has confirmed that lying is simply a condition of life. In her research she found that both men and women lie in approximately a fifth of their social exchanges lasting 10 or more minutes. Wow. And over the course of a week we deceive about 30 percent of people we have 1:1 interactions with. Wow wow.

Women are more likely to tell altruistic lies to avoiding hurting other peoples feelings, and men are more likely to lie about themselves. De Paulo found that men lie more often to impress. A typical conversation between two guys contains about eight times as many self-oriented lies as it does lies about others.

Your Brain On Lies

Three key parts of our brain are stimulated when we lie. First, the frontal lobe (of the neocortex), which has the ability to suppress truthyes, its capable of dishonesty due to its intellectual role. Second, the limbic system due to the anxiety (hi, amygdala!) that comes with deceptionand yes, when were lied to our Spiderman sense here can perk up, just as we can feel guilty/stressed when were doing the lying. And third, the temporal lobe is involved because its responsible for retrieving memories and creating mental imagery. Just for fun, add the anterior cingulate cortex because it helps in monitoring errors, and the dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex because it is trying all the while to control our behavior. Our brain is busy, busy, busy when we lie.

And its far more peaceful when we tell the truth, because our limbic systems isnt stressed about lying and our frontal lobe isnt inhibiting the truth.

Lies At Work

Where do we see a prevalence of lies? At work, or more specifically, to get out of work.

According to Zetys recent 2020 research, of over 1,000 Americans, they found 96% confessed to lying to get out of work. Heres the net-net:

More men than women were caught lying, and only 27% of respondents who lied to get out of work regretted it. For those caught, 70% regretted lying. But despite not feeling bad about themselves for lying, 59% of respondents said they wouldnt do it again.

Heres a silver lining: the older we get, the less compelled we are to lie to avoid work. Zety found:

Zety

Are we all pathological liars? Or do we need to look at why we feel compelled to make up stories instead of just telling the truth? Is lying to avoid work a cultural problem, at least in part? And what about people that dont experience regret when they lie? The stance of perpetual innocence, or extreme entitlement (and thus reality distortion) is a topic I addressed in my blogs on Borderline Personalities: How To Survive and How To Thrive.

Lying Rx

To reduce the amount of lying in your workplace, youll want to first look at how safe people feel. Is it ok to tell the truth? Is it ok to fail? Is it ok to be human and not a super hero/work robot/cog in a wheel? Is it ok to have feelings and need a break now and then? Find out.

Do regular employee engagement surveys see our fave one here.

Use the emotion wheel at the beginning of each meeting to check in on how everyone is doing

Create support groups if people need a little extra help

So why do we lie? Because it works for us. Temporarily, at least. For fun, you might want to join me in telling the five types of truth; youll notice not only how good it feels, but how much simpler it makes your life.

How often do you lie? Why?

Read the rest here:
Why We Lie, And The Neuroscience Behind It - Forbes

Neuroscience

MRI and PET Reveal Link Between Blood Flow and Tau Accumulation in Alzheimer’s Patients – Diagnostic Imaging

There is a connection between impaired blood flow and the build-up of tau protein in patients who have Alzheimers disease, according to findings revealed on MRI and PET scans.

In a study published Oct. 12 in the Journal of Neuroscience, a team of investigators from the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles shed more light onto the vascular component of Alzheimers, noting that their findings point to the potential of a combination treatment.

Our results demonstrate vascular-tau association across the [Alzheimers disease] spectrum and suggest that early vascular-tau associations are exacerbated in the presence of amyloid, consistent with a two-hit model of [Alzheimers disease] on cognition, said the team led by Daniel Albrecht, Ph.D., a neuroimaging research fellow. Combination treatments targeting vascular health, as well as amyloid- and tau levels, may preserve cognitive function more effectively than single-target therapies.

To date, the connection between vascular dysfunction and tau pathology and how it affects cognition has not been well understood. Still, there is a growing body of evidence that shows vascular dysfunction plays a large part in Alzheimers pathophysiology.

Like the proverbial chicken and egg, it remains unclear if impaired blood flow causes or is caused by errant protein building, they said, or if these two symptoms occur for unrelated reasons.

Related Content: FDA Approves First Radiopharmaceutical for Imaging Tau

To dig deeper into this connection, Albrechts team used MRI and PET scans to compare blood flow and tau build-up in older adults. They examined 68 patients from USC who ranged from having normal cognition to showing signs of mild cognitive impairment, as well as a validation group of 138 individuals with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimers disease who were enrolled in the Alzheimers disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Alongside their MRI and PET scans, all patients completed neuropsychological testing and were assessed for executive brain function, attention, and memory.

Based on their analysis, the team discovered that spots in the brain with more significant tau build-up also had decreased blood flow. This was particularly apparent in the inferior temporal gyrus the area of the brain which typically experiences tau build-up in patients with Alzheimers disease. The team pointed out that this relationship also held true for the validation group.

The correlation between tau and vascular function was stronger in people with greater cognitive impairment and higher amyloid- levels, they said. It also appeared in more brain regions as the disease progressed in severity.

Consequently, Albrechts team said, their results suggest that targeting vascular function could be key to avoiding and treatment Alzheimers.

Results from the current study provide the first evidence of associations between elevated tau PET signal and vascular dysfunction, they said. Take together, combination treatments targeting vascular health, as well as amyloid- and tau levels, may be more effective in preserving cognitive function than single-target therapies.

Read the original post:
MRI and PET Reveal Link Between Blood Flow and Tau Accumulation in Alzheimer's Patients - Diagnostic Imaging

Neuroscience

Monkey study suggests that they, like humans, may have ‘self-domesticated’ – Science Codex

It's not a coincidence that dogs are cuter than wolves, or that goats at a petting zoo have shorter horns and friendlier demeanors than their wild ancestors. Scientists call this "domestication syndrome" -- the idea that breeding out aggression inadvertently leads to physical changes, including floppier ears, shorter muzzles and snouts, curlier tails, paler fur, smaller brains, and more.

The link appears to come from certain neural crest cells, present before birth and in newborns, that have a versatility akin to stem cells. These neural crest cells can turn into a handful of different things, specifically adrenal cells -- which boost the strength of the "fight or flight" response -- as well as physical traits like larger teeth and stiffer ears.

Ever since Darwin's time, some scientists have speculated that humans "self-domesticated" -- that we chose less aggressive and more helpful partners, with the result that we have shifted the trajectory of our own evolution.

"The evidence for this has been largely circumstantial," said Asif Ghazanfar, a professor of psychology and neuroscience. "It's really a popular and exciting idea but one that lacks direct evidence, a link between friendly behavior and other features of domestication."

To see if the story could be put on a robust foundation, Ghazanfar turned to marmoset monkeys. Like humans, marmosets are extremely social and cooperative, plus they have several of the physical markers consistent with domestication, including a patch of white fur on their foreheads that is common in domesticated mammals.

What does cooperation look like in a monkey? Friendly vocal exchanges, caring for each other's young, and sharing food, among other signs, said Ghazanfar.

The research team showed that the size of a marmoset's white fur patch was strongly related to how frequently it produced friendly vocal responses to another. This is the first set of data to show an association between a friendly behavior and a physical domestication trait in individual animals.

To show a causal link between the white patch and vocal behavior, the researchers tested infant twins in different ways. In very brief sessions, one twin got reliable vocal feedback from a simulated parent -- a computer programmed with adult calls that responded to 100% of their vocalizations -- while the other twin only heard parental responses to 10% of their sounds.

These experimental sessions lasted 40 minutes, every other day, for most of the first 60 days of the monkeys' lives. For the other 23+ hours of each day, the monkeys were with their families.

In previous work, Ghazanfar and his colleagues showed that the infants who received more feedback learned to speak -- or more precisely, developed their adult-sounding calls -- faster than their siblings. By also measuring the white fur patches on the developing monkeys' foreheads at the same time and for three more months, the researchers discovered that the rate of the white facial coloration development was also accelerated by increased parental vocal responses. This shows a developmental connection between facial fur coloration and vocal development -- they are both influenced by parents.

That connection may be via those neural crest cells that can turn into "fight or flight" cells and that also contribute to parts of the larynx, which is necessary for producing vocalizations.

Domestication in other species has also been linked to changes in vocal behavior. Foxes selected for tameness have altered their vocalizations in response to the presence of humans. Similarly, a tame Bengalese finch learns and produces a more complex song, and retains greater song plasticity in adulthood, than its wild cousins.

But this is the first study linking the degree of a social trait with the size of a physical sign of domestication, in any species, said the researchers. Their findings are detailed in an article published online in the journal Current Biology. Ghazanfar's co-authors include Daniel Takahashi, a former postdoctoral researcher who is now a professor of neuroscience at Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil; Rebecca Terrett of the Class of 2016; Lauren Kelly, Ghazanfar's former lab manager, who now works at Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School; and two collaborators from New York University, James Higham and Sandra Winters.

"If you change the rate of the marmosets' vocal development, then you change the rate of fur coloration," said Ghazanfar. "It's both a fascinating and strange set of results!"

Go here to read the rest:
Monkey study suggests that they, like humans, may have 'self-domesticated' - Science Codex

Neuroscience

tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market 2020 Outlook, Key Strategies, Manufacturers, Type and Application, Forecast To 2026 | Neuroelectrics, Magstim, NeuroCare…

The report titled Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market is one of the most comprehensive and important additions to QY Researchs archive of market research studies. It offers detailed research and analysis of key aspects of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market. The market analysts authoring this report have provided in-depth information on leading growth drivers, restraints, challenges, trends, and opportunities to offer a complete analysis of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market. Market participants can use the analysis on market dynamics to plan effective growth strategies and prepare for future challenges beforehand. Each trend of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market is carefully analyzed and researched about by the market analysts.The market analysts and researchers have done extensive analysis of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market with the help of research methodologies such as PESTLE and Porters Five Forces analysis. They have provided accurate and reliable market data and useful recommendations with an aim to help the players gain an insight into the overall present and future market scenario. The tDCS, tACS and tRNS report comprises in-depth study of the potential segments including product type, application, and end user and their contribution to the overall market size.

Get PDF Sample Copy of Report: (Including TOC, List of Tables & Figures, Chart) https://www.qyresearch.com/sample-form/form/2144856/global-tdcs-tacs-and-trns-market

In addition, market revenues based on region and country are provided in the tDCS, tACS and tRNS report. The authors of the report have also shed light on the common business tactics adopted by players. The leading players of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market and their complete profiles are included in the report. Besides that, investment opportunities, recommendations, and trends that are trending at present in the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market are mapped by the report. With the help of this report, the key players of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market will be able to make sound decisions and plan their strategies accordingly to stay ahead of the curve.

Competitive landscape is a critical aspect every key player needs to be familiar with. The report throws light on the competitive scenario of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market to know the competition at both the domestic and global levels. Market experts have also offered the outline of every leading player of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market, considering the key aspects such as areas of operation, production, and product portfolio. Additionally, companies in the report are studied based on the key factors such as company size, market share, market growth, revenue, production volume, and profits.

Key Players Mentioned in the Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Research Report: Neuroelectrics, Magstim, NeuroCare Group, Soterix Medical, Newronika, Rogue Resolutions, Flow Neuroscience, Shenzhen Yingchi Technology, Shenzhen Hanix United, TCT Research, EB Neuro SpA

Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Segmentation by Product: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS)Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation (tRNS)

Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Segmentation by Application: HospitalClinicHomeOthers

The tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market report has been segregated based on distinct categories, such as product type, application, end user, and region. Each and every segment is evaluated on the basis of CAGR, share, and growth potential. In the regional analysis, the report highlights the prospective region, which is estimated to generate opportunities in the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market in the forthcoming years. This segmental analysis will surely turn out to be a useful tool for the readers, stakeholders, and market participants to get a complete picture of the global tDCS, tACS and tRNS market and its potential to grow in the years to come.

Key questions answered in the report:

Request for customization in Report: https://www.qyresearch.com/customize-request/form/2144856/global-tdcs-tacs-and-trns-market

Table of Contents:

1 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Overview1.1 Product Overview and Scope of tDCS, tACS and tRNS1.2 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Segment by Type1.2.1 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Growth Rate Comparison by Type 2020 VS 20261.2.2 Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)1.2.3 Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS)1.2.4 Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation (tRNS)1.3 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Segment by Application1.3.1 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption Comparison by Application: 2020 VS 20261.3.2 Hospital1.3.3 Clinic1.3.4 Home1.3.5 Others1.4 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market by Region1.4.1 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Size Estimates and Forecasts by Region: 2020 VS 20261.4.2 North America Estimates and Forecasts (2015-2026)1.4.3 Europe Estimates and Forecasts (2015-2026)1.4.4 China Estimates and Forecasts (2015-2026)1.4.5 Japan Estimates and Forecasts (2015-2026)1.5 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Growth Prospects1.5.1 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Revenue Estimates and Forecasts (2015-2026)1.5.2 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity Estimates and Forecasts (2015-2026)1.5.3 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Estimates and Forecasts (2015-2026)1.6 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Industry1.7 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Trends

2 Market Competition by Manufacturers2.1 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity Market Share by Manufacturers (2015-2020)2.2 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Revenue Share by Manufacturers (2015-2020)2.3 Market Share by Company Type (Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3)2.4 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Average Price by Manufacturers (2015-2020)2.5 Manufacturers tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites, Area Served, Product Types2.6 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Competitive Situation and Trends2.6.1 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Concentration Rate2.6.2 Global Top 3 and Top 5 Players Market Share by Revenue2.6.3 Mergers & Acquisitions, Expansion

3 Production and Capacity by Region3.1 Global Production Capacity of tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Share by Regions (2015-2020)3.2 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Revenue Market Share by Regions (2015-2020)3.3 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)3.4 North America tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production3.4.1 North America tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Growth Rate (2015-2020)3.4.2 North America tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)3.5 Europe tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production3.5.1 Europe tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Growth Rate (2015-2020)3.5.2 Europe tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)3.6 China tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production3.6.1 China tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Growth Rate (2015-2020)3.6.2 China tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)3.7 Japan tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production3.7.1 Japan tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Growth Rate (2015-2020)3.7.2 Japan tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)

4 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption by Regions4.1 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption by Regions4.1.1 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption by Region4.1.2 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption Market Share by Region4.2 North America4.2.1 North America tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption by Countries4.2.2 U.S.4.2.3 Canada4.3 Europe4.3.1 Europe tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption by Countries4.3.2 Germany4.3.3 France4.3.4 U.K.4.3.5 Italy4.3.6 Russia4.4 Asia Pacific4.4.1 Asia Pacific tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption by Region4.4.2 China4.4.3 Japan4.4.4 South Korea4.4.5 Taiwan4.4.6 Southeast Asia4.4.7 India4.4.8 Australia4.5 Latin America4.5.1 Latin America tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption by Countries4.5.2 Mexico4.5.3 Brazil

5 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production, Revenue, Price Trend by Type5.1 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Market Share by Type (2015-2020)5.2 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Revenue Market Share by Type (2015-2020)5.3 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Price by Type (2015-2020)5.4 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Share by Price Tier (2015-2020): Low-End, Mid-Range and High-End

6 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market Analysis by Application6.1 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption Market Share by Application (2015-2020)6.2 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Consumption Growth Rate by Application (2015-2020)

7 Company Profiles and Key Figures in tDCS, tACS and tRNS Business7.1 Neuroelectrics7.1.1 Neuroelectrics tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.1.2 Neuroelectrics tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.1.3 Neuroelectrics tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.1.4 Neuroelectrics Main Business and Markets Served7.2 Magstim7.2.1 Magstim tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.2.2 Magstim tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.2.3 Magstim tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.2.4 Magstim Main Business and Markets Served7.3 NeuroCare Group7.3.1 NeuroCare Group tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.3.2 NeuroCare Group tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.3.3 NeuroCare Group tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.3.4 NeuroCare Group Main Business and Markets Served7.4 Soterix Medical7.4.1 Soterix Medical tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.4.2 Soterix Medical tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.4.3 Soterix Medical tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.4.4 Soterix Medical Main Business and Markets Served7.5 Newronika7.5.1 Newronika tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.5.2 Newronika tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.5.3 Newronika tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.5.4 Newronika Main Business and Markets Served7.6 Rogue Resolutions7.6.1 Rogue Resolutions tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.6.2 Rogue Resolutions tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.6.3 Rogue Resolutions tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.6.4 Rogue Resolutions Main Business and Markets Served7.7 Flow Neuroscience7.7.1 Flow Neuroscience tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.7.2 Flow Neuroscience tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.7.3 Flow Neuroscience tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.7.4 Flow Neuroscience Main Business and Markets Served7.8 Shenzhen Yingchi Technology7.8.1 Shenzhen Yingchi Technology tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.8.2 Shenzhen Yingchi Technology tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.8.3 Shenzhen Yingchi Technology tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.8.4 Shenzhen Yingchi Technology Main Business and Markets Served7.9 Shenzhen Hanix United7.9.1 Shenzhen Hanix United tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.9.2 Shenzhen Hanix United tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.9.3 Shenzhen Hanix United tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.9.4 Shenzhen Hanix United Main Business and Markets Served7.10 TCT Research7.10.1 TCT Research tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.10.2 TCT Research tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.10.3 TCT Research tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.10.4 TCT Research Main Business and Markets Served7.11 EB Neuro SpA7.11.1 EB Neuro SpA tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Sites and Area Served7.11.2 EB Neuro SpA tDCS, tACS and tRNS Product Introduction, Application and Specification7.11.3 EB Neuro SpA tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Capacity, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015-2020)7.11.4 EB Neuro SpA Main Business and Markets Served

8 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Manufacturing Cost Analysis8.1 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Key Raw Materials Analysis8.1.1 Key Raw Materials8.1.2 Key Raw Materials Price Trend8.1.3 Key Suppliers of Raw Materials8.2 Proportion of Manufacturing Cost Structure8.3 Manufacturing Process Analysis of tDCS, tACS and tRNS8.4 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Industrial Chain Analysis

9 Marketing Channel, Distributors and Customers9.1 Marketing Channel9.2 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Distributors List9.3 tDCS, tACS and tRNS Customers

10 Market Dynamics10.1 Market Trends10.2 Opportunities and Drivers10.3 Challenges10.4 Porters Five Forces Analysis

11 Production and Supply Forecast11.1 Global Forecasted Production of tDCS, tACS and tRNS (2021-2026)11.2 Global Forecasted Revenue of tDCS, tACS and tRNS (2021-2026)11.3 Global Forecasted Price of tDCS, tACS and tRNS (2021-2026)11.4 Global tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production Forecast by Regions (2021-2026)11.4.1 North America tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production, Revenue Forecast (2021-2026)11.4.2 Europe tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production, Revenue Forecast (2021-2026)11.4.3 China tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production, Revenue Forecast (2021-2026)11.4.4 Japan tDCS, tACS and tRNS Production, Revenue Forecast (2021-2026)

12 Consumption and Demand Forecast12.1 Global Forecasted and Consumption Demand Analysis of tDCS, tACS and tRNS12.2 North America Forecasted Consumption of tDCS, tACS and tRNS by Country12.3 Europe Market Forecasted Consumption of tDCS, tACS and tRNS by Country12.4 Asia Pacific Market Forecasted Consumption of tDCS, tACS and tRNS by Regions12.5 Latin America Forecasted Consumption of tDCS, tACS and tRNS13 Forecast by Type and by Application (2021-2026)13.1 Global Production, Revenue and Price Forecast by Type (2021-2026)13.1.1 Global Forecasted Production of tDCS, tACS and tRNS by Type (2021-2026)13.1.2 Global Forecasted Revenue of tDCS, tACS and tRNS by Type (2021-2026)13.1.2 Global Forecasted Price of tDCS, tACS and tRNS by Type (2021-2026)13.2 Global Forecasted Consumption of tDCS, tACS and tRNS by Application (2021-2026)14 Research Finding and Conclusion

15 Methodology and Data Source15.1 Methodology/Research Approach15.1.1 Research Programs/Design15.1.2 Market Size Estimation15.1.3 Market Breakdown and Data Triangulation15.2 Data Source15.2.1 Secondary Sources15.2.2 Primary Sources15.3 Author List15.4 Disclaimer

About Us:

QY Research established in 2007, focus on custom research, management consulting, IPO consulting, industry chain research, data base and seminar services. The company owned a large basic data base (such as National Bureau of statistics database, Customs import and export database, Industry Association Database etc), experts resources (included energy automotive chemical medical ICT consumer goods etc.

Read the original here:
tDCS, tACS and tRNS Market 2020 Outlook, Key Strategies, Manufacturers, Type and Application, Forecast To 2026 | Neuroelectrics, Magstim, NeuroCare...

Anatomy

2020 MLB playoffs – Could the 2020 Astros join the 2004 Red Sox on Saturday? The anatomy of a 3-0 comeback – ESPN

The 2004 Boston Red Sox inspired a library's worth of books, special edition magazines and documentaries recounting their miraculous run to World Series champions. That team, affectionately known as "The Idiots," ended the franchise's 86-year-old World Series drought. Breaking the curse made them one of the most famous and beloved teams in baseball history.

Now the 2020 Houston Astros are trying to match one of Boston's historic achievements: The Red Sox are the only team in major league postseason history to win a best-of-7 series after losing the first three games. The Astros forced Saturday's Game 7 with a 7-4 win over the Tampa Bay Rays on Friday at Petco Park in San Diego.

The Astros, of course, do not have a cute nickname. Baseball fans around the country might have another name for them, but it's definitely not cute. The Red Sox rallied to beat the New York Yankees, not only their sworn enemy but a team that had played in six of the previous eight World Series. The Astros are trying to knock off the scrappy, low-payroll Rays, a franchise with 27 fewer World Series titles than the Yankees.

The Astros are aware of the history they're chasing. Alex Bregman made his teammates watch the "Four Days in October" documentary on the Red Sox before Game 5. Well, some of his teammates anyway; Michael Brantley said he hadn't heard about it. Still, with the Astros on the brink of matching Boston's feat, let's see what kind of comparisons we can find between what happened in 2004 and what the Astros are doing in 2020.

Think of all the mental baggage the Red Sox had to deal with: They were fighting the curse; they had lost a heartbreaking 2003 American League Championship Series to the Yankees in seven games; and then the Yankees trounced them in the first three games in 2004 by scores of 10-7, 3-1 and 19-8. On top of that, staff ace Curt Schilling was battling an ankle injury and had been bombed in Game 1. The Red Sox didn't know if he'd pitch again in the series.

2 Related

The Astros have their own baggage with the offseason cheating revelation that made them the most hated team in the majors (and their own ace, Justin Verlander, has been out since August after Tommy John surgery). One big difference here is that they had been close in the first three games. Jose Altuve made two crucial throwing errors, and the Rays played outstanding defense, especially in Game 3; but the Astros pitched well, and they not only outhit the Rays 26-18 but hit the ball harder more often.

The Red Sox had a carefree attitude, and perhaps being down 3-0 put less pressure on them. They also knew they were as good as the Yankees, after going 11-8 against them in the regular season.

The Astros knew they just needed a few breaks to start going their way and that while luck doesn't always even out in a short series, if they kept hitting the ball hard, good results were bound to happen.

"So far things really haven't been going our way," Houston manager Dusty Baker said after Game 3. "We really have our backs up against the wall. It is a steep mountain to climb, but it is not impossible. We just have to tighten our belts, put our big boy pants on and come out fighting tomorrow."

Despite the positive attitude heading into the game, the Red Sox found themselves down 4-3 in the bottom of the ninth with the invincible Mariano Rivera in the game. You know what happened. Kevin Millar led off with a five-pitch walk. Pinch runner Dave Roberts stole second -- barely -- and Bill Mueller singled him home. Forgotten: David Ortiz popped out with the bases loaded to end the inning. Ortiz delivered three innings later, however, with a walk-off, two-run home run off Paul Quantrill.

Most teams don't even get to a Game 5. Of the 39 best-of-seven series that were 3-0, 28 ended up in sweeps. Most teams, after a long season, are physically tired and mentally exhausted, and winning four in a row against a good team could feel futile.

The Astros took an early 2-0 lead, the Rays tied it, but then George Springer hit a two-run home run off Tyler Glasnow in the fifth inning -- the winning blow in the eventual 4-3 victory. Indeed, Houston's luck finally turned in the ninth when Willy Adames' RBI double off the wall in left-center missed being a game-tying home run by just a few feet.

Springer went 3-for-4 in the game, while Altuve went 2-for-4 with a home run and double. The Red Sox had Ortiz, one of the most clutch postseason hitters of all time, but the Astros have Springer and Altuve. Check out the career postseason lines for the three (entering Game 6 for Springer and Altuve):

Springer: .274/.353/.560, 19 HRs in 252 ABsAltuve: .298/.368/.560, 18 HRs in 248 ABsOrtiz: .289/.404/.543, 17 HRs in 304 ABs

Astros players held a pregame meeting, but Baker even laughed that off a bit after the game. "I think us as a society, we meet sometimes too much. All we do is state the obvious," Baker said. "We are in the process of about to be eliminated if we lose this game tonight, nobody is ready to go home, we are ready to go to Dallas." In other words, it's about talking with your bats, and it was no surprise that Houston's versions of David Ortiz came through with the big hits.

Only three of those 39 teams that were down 3-0 had pushed it to six games before the Astros. The Red Sox pulled off another dramatic victory, winning 5-4 in 14 innings on Ortiz's two-out, walk-off single. The Yankees actually led 4-2 entering the bottom of the eighth, but Ortiz homered off Tom Gordon, Millar walked and Trot Nixon singled. Only then did Rivera come into the game, giving up the tying run on a sacrifice fly. Maybe if Joe Torre brought Rivera in for a two-inning save -- like the manager often did -- things would have turned out differently. Rivera had thrown 40 pitches in Game 4, however, and Gordon had been outstanding that year.

Your guide to MLB's bubble ballparks ALCS preview: Rays vs. Astros Astros?!? How angry should you be? NLCS preview: Dodgers vs. Braves Why Braves are big threat to Dodgers Playoff bracket, schedule and more

The big difference between the Red Sox and Astros? The Red Sox had a pretty good No. 2 starter going in Game 5: Pedro Martinez. Dusty Baker had to improvise and go with a bullpen game, electing to avoid starting Framber Valdez on short rest and keeping No. 5 starter Cristian Javier in relief. The first five pitchers Baker used were rookies. The Rays hit three home runs, but all were solo shots. Springer homered in the first inning, and then Correa came up in the bottom of the ninth with the game tied.

Correa called his shot: "When I went into that at-bat, I told Altuve walking off the field [that] 'I'm gonna end it.' I could feel that my swing was in sync, I could feel that my rhythm was good, I could feel that I wanted to drive the ball and I felt like I could do it."

He did. And just like that, all the momentum was now in Houston's favor. They were still alive, they had their top starter ready for Game 6, the hits were falling and the pressure was now on Tampa Bay.

As it turned out, Schilling was able to pitch again. One important -- and often forgotten -- note about the 2004 series is that Game 3 was initially rained out, so the final five games were played over five days, with no off day before Game 6. Due to the rainout, Martinez was able to start Game 5 on regular rest, allowing Schilling to be pushed back another day. Schilling had a temporary procedure performed on his ankle, so this was the famous Bloody Sock game. He allowed one run over seven innings, Mark Bellhorn hit a three-run home run and the Red Sox won 4-2.

Refusing to panic in Game 5 meant Baker was able to start Valdez on full rest. Again, there was some luck here. If Game 5 had gone to the 10th inning, Baker said Valdez would have entered. Correa's home run not only won Game 5, but it arguably won Game 6, as well. Valdez allowed one run in six innings, and Kevin Cash's quick hook of starter Blake Snell in the fifth inning after a walk and base hit backfired as the Astros scored four runs to take a 4-1 lead.

Both managers in 2004 were in a bind. Terry Francona had no clear option. His rotation had gone Schilling, Martinez, Bronson Arroyo, Derek Lowe, Martinez and Schilling. Arroyo had pitched an inning of relief in Game 6. Francona went with Lowe on two days' rest. Torre's rotation had gone Mike Mussina, Jon Lieber, Kevin Brown, Orlando Hernandez, Mussina and Lieber. Javier Vazquez was the solid fifth starter, but he had thrown 96 pitches in relief of Brown in Game 3 after Brown lasted just two innings. The game eventually turned into a blowout, but Torre ended up burning two starting pitchers. Brown had thrown just 57 pitches, so Torre went with him on three days' rest. Bad choice. Ortiz --- yes, again -- hit a two-run homer in the first; and with the bases loaded in the second, Vazquez replaced Brown, and Johnny Damon greeted him with a grand slam. The Red Sox won 10-3.

Is your squad out of the MLB postseason? Here's what's on the offseason to-do list.

American League

MIN | CLE | TOR | CHW | OAK | NYY | HOU

National League

CIN | MIL | CHC | STL | MIA | SD

For the Astros and Rays, neither Baker nor Cash are in the same scramble mode with their pitching staffs. Game 2 starters Lance McCullers Jr. and Charlie Morton will be on regular rest. Because Game 6 turned into a decisive loss, the Rays were able to save all their top relievers, with the exception of Diego Castillo, who threw 14 pitches. Manuel Margot's two-run home run in the eighth forced Baker to use closer Ryan Pressly for the third straight day, so that's a minor issue; but Pressly had a quick, nine-pitch inning, and he has thrown 39 pitches over those three games. He'll be ready.

But like the game at Yankee Stadium in 2004, you wonder if it will come down to the first two innings and not the ninth. You could see the dichotomy in emotions on one play in the sixth inning of Game 6. It was 5-1 at the time, but the Rays put two on with one out against Valdez, who had just walked Yandy Diaz, with the two exchanging words after Diaz barked at Valdez after ball four. Valdez was now approaching 100 pitches and tiring, but he induced Brandon Lowe to hit into a double play, Lowe slamming his helmet down on the ground as he crossed over first base. Valdez pumped his first and celebrated with Correa and Altuve as he walked off the field. After that play, I texted a friend, "This series is over."

I know. Baseball isn't supposed to be like that. Momentum is a word used by writers and pundits, not players. But the frustration for the Rays is there. We can see it.

"They are frustrated. We are all frustrated," Cash said. "I don't think they are tensing up. I think they are recognizing that we got an opportunity for the fourth time now to do something special. And have confidence that we can find ways to really compete and get the bats going, score some runs for Charlie and find a way to win."

Diaz's act of hubris reminded me off the infamous Alex Rodriguez-Bronson Arroyo incident from Game 6 in 2004, when Rodriguez swatted the ball out of Arroyo's glove and was called out for interference. As with Diaz, the thought was, "What was he thinking? Why are you shouting at the opponent after drawing a walk?" Similarly, when Snell was removed, he mouthed the words, "What the f--- are we doing?" Mike Zunino snapped his bat after a strikeout. That 3-0 series lead feels like a long time ago.

"We are relentless, and when we say we don't want to go home, we really meant that. We want to keep playing baseball, and we don't want this to be the end of our season," Correa said. "We took care of these three games, and now we got to care of one more. If we don't win that game, then this all meant nothing. We have to go out there tomorrow and get that win."

Continue reading here:
2020 MLB playoffs - Could the 2020 Astros join the 2004 Red Sox on Saturday? The anatomy of a 3-0 comeback - ESPN

Anatomy

Anatomy of an escape for the win: NY Giants survive with defensive touchdown, 2-point stop – NorthJersey.com

NorthJersey.com's Art Stapleton discusses the New York Giants' first win against The Washington Football team on Sunday. NorthJersey.com

EAST RUTHERFORD - The Giants needed someone on defense to make a play.

Twice.

And both times, unlike in the first five games of the season,they found a way to finish off the Washington Football Team for the first victory of the Joe Judge era Sunday, 20-19.

Tae Crowder, the last pick in the 2020 NFL Draft took care of the first one when he picked up a fumble and raced 43 yards for a decisive touchdown with 3:29 left.

Then Dexter Lawrence, one of their first-round picks last year, and Blake Martinez, one of this offseason's big free agent signings, managed to combine to smother Washington quarterback Kyle Allen as he rolled out looking for an open receiver on a potential game-winning two-point conversion with 36 seconds remaining.

"It was special, it's not like we won a playoff [game], we still have a lot of work to do, no bragging rights or anything like that," Giants defensive linemanLeonard Williams said. "But it was definitely - we've been working really hard through camp, we've been working really hard through the beginning of the season, and we finally got that win under our belt, it was nice to see guys smiling in the locker room after putting in that much hard work. We kinda got tired of going into the locker room and seeing sad faces."

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Those sad faces may have emerged if not for those two plays that keyed the Giant escape:

The Giants were on the ropes, and it was obvious. All the Washington Football Team needed was a field goal, and the collapse from up 13-3 late in the first half would have been complete.

But on third-and-6 near midfield, Kyler Fackrell beat Washington left tackle Geron Christian and sacked Allen, who inexplicably spun and lost the football in the process of going down to the turf. The ball bounced at the feet of Crowder, whose contributions as a rookie have belied the nickname of Mr. Irrelevant he earned with the selection as the last pick in the draft.

NY GIANTS: Wide receiver C.J. Board injured and carted off field after scary collision

Crowder bobbled his first attempt at scooping up the ball, but actually helped his second try by creating a bit of a bounce off the turf. Once the linebacker from Georgia secured the handle, he sprinted toward the end zone with Washington wide receiver Terry McLaurin chasing from behind.

Cam Brown, another rookie, knocked McLaurin off line just slightly with a block, creating enough separation for Crowder to go untouched into the end zone.

James Bradberry was clearly being tongue-in-cheek when he said after the game he would take the 6-foot-4, 342-pound Dexter Lawrence in a footrace against most quarterbacks in the league.

The Giants had reason to smile, though, and Lawrence did force Allen to hesitate as he hustled to try and take an angle that cut off a path to the end zone.

The defensive play called by Giants defensive coordinator Patrick Graham was one they installed Friday, went over Saturday and decided to use in the biggest moment Sunday.

When Allen rolled out, both Lawrence and Martinez tracked him. It looked as though Allen had enough room to try and run to the goal line for the victory, but Lawrence tracked him well enough to prevent that. Jabrill Peppers was also in coverage near the goal line, and because of the hesitation, the Giants' safety would have likely been there to make a run at Allen as well.

Lawrence decked Allen to force the incomplete, andPeppers completed the stand with a pair of back flips in celebration.

Art Stapleton is the Giants beat writer for NorthJersey.com. For unlimited access to all Giants analysis, news, trades and more, pleasesubscribe todayand sign up for our NFC East newsletter.

Email:stapleton@northjersey.com

Twitter:@art_stapleton

Original post:
Anatomy of an escape for the win: NY Giants survive with defensive touchdown, 2-point stop - NorthJersey.com

Anatomy

Anatomy of a play: Breaking down the Rams use of fly motion – Niners Nation

Since the 49ers lost and there wasnt much to break down, that wouldve been interesting for this series, and since the Rams are in town for Sunday Night Football, this weeks Anatomy of a play will look at the Rams use of fly motions in the running and passing games and give a surface level introduction to the Rams base offense.

Before the season started, I wrote about where Rams head coach Sean McVay fits in with the west coast offense coaching lineage, and those can be read at length here and here. I also wrote an in-depth longer piece on the 2020 Rams offensive adjustments since their 2018 season that ended in a Super Bowl loss and left many wondering if the league had figured out the Shanahan/McVay scheme.

I covered several adjustments in that piece, but the Rams seem to add new wrinkles to old concepts every week since I hit publish, so there a couple more things to add to it.

Briefly, the Rams offense is the Shanahan offense but predominantly out of 11 personnel instead of 21 personnel. The Rams still run an outside zone-based running game and take shots off of play-action. But the outside zone is actually more of whats referred to as a mid-zone run.

The run action is still the same as the offensive line moving laterally to reach defenders. The main difference is that the play side tackle kicks out the edge defender instead of reach blocking like they do with the Shanahan version of the outside zone.

This changes the running backs primary read to the B-gap/inside hip of the tackle versus the C-gap/outside hip of the tackle or tight end. The idea is to get the running back to the open space quicker than it does with the outside zone.

In the play above from the 2018 Rams at 49ers, you can see that running back, Todd Gurley hits the running lane between the edge defender and first defensive lineman inside that edge defender because that second defender is reached and pinned inside.

Occasionally, this is important for understanding McVays evolution; the Rams would add a fly motion element away from the run call.

Fly motion must be respected by the defense because its another potential ball carrier that can gash them if they respond to its movement.

Usually, the fly motion gets the defense to bump over one gap to account for the numbers advantage it gives the offense. This will be important below later.

But McVays running scheme is not without its limitations. Eventually, the teams adapt, and in the latter half of 2018, Chicago Bears defensive coordinator Vic Fangio gave the rest of the league the blueprint when he shifted his front into a 6-1 tilt front.

The 6-1 was further utilized by the Patriots in the Super Bowl where they completely shut down the Rams offense.

The 6-1 prevents zone run blockers up front from executing double teams and instead puts pressure on the lineman to hold and win 1-on-1 matchups with the defensive line. McVays 11 personnel was not conducive to blocking the 6-1.

They struggled with those same front in 2019, and combined with injuries; the Rams would finish 9-7 for third in the division. Still pretty good!

So what has McVay done in 2020 to adapt?

In one of the above examples, the fly motion away from the run call was an almost regular feature of the run game but not enough that it became a staple. It was a nice wrinkle. In 2020 however, the Rams fly motion is as much of a staple of the offense as anything else.

However, with one small tweak, the Rams have added yet another layer to their arsenal of potent offensive capabilities: fly motion toward the mid zone. Its a very simple adjustment that has paid off tremendously for them through the first five games of 2020.

The fly motion creates favorable angles for the blockers up front. Since the Rams dont use a fullback create favorable angles, the fly motion acts as the de facto fullback by moving defenders into gaps that are easier for the offensive line to reach, especially in the second level. Also notice the kick out block by the left tackle.

As Goff motions the fly receiver across, notice how the linebackers in the second level shift over one gap to account for the numbers the offense moves to that side. Goff snaps the ball as the linebackers are shifting, and the defenders dont have time to execute a rocker step and fall back into the gaps they vacated to close off the cutback. (On the rocker step, the linebacker will take two steps toward the play side before folding back to play the cutback)

The result is defenders out of position and easy blocking angles for the linemen to execute their second-level blocks.

The Rams also have several ways theyll utilize fly motion in the passing, specifically on play-action passes.

In week one against the Cowboys, the Rams used fly motion to get a receiver out to the flat very quickly, giving Goff an easy read. If the defensive end pursues the quarterback out on the bootleg, Goff could just dump it off to the open flat receiver.

Here against the Cowboys, the fly motion gives the quarterback an easier, defined read and prevents the flat receiver from being eliminated by the flat defender because the flat defender has to make a choice between the quarterback or flat receiver. The read for Goff is easy; as soon as he identifies the defender vacating the flat, he dumps it off his receiver.

The Rams will also fly motion as misdirection away from the run call, too, similar to how they did with fly away from the mid zone.

The sift windback is another way to get favorable blocking angles by washing down defenders and moving them away from the point of attack. The play looks like mid zone to the left with Goff opening to the left and running back Darrell Henderson taking a step in that direction but its actually a counter step before he takes the handoff going to the right.

The fly motion to the left moves the defenders over to the next gap, and the flow at the snap takes them right out of the play as they try to fall back into the backside run fits. That movement makes the blocking angle easier for the offensive line as they get blocks just long enough to get Henderson free on the edge with Kupp lead blocking on a sift to kick out the edge defender.

Later in that same game, the Rams ran the same run action but with play action with the receiver assignments flipped for a touchdown.

TreDavious White has a Kupp man to man on this play and remembering the action from the play above, comes up to play the run when he sees Kupp simulate a down block.

Kupps delayed release into his route gets him wide open as White watches for the sift block and replaces the safety who got taken inside by Kupp. Kupp gets wide open for a touchdown.

In week five, the Rams added another wrinkle to their play action drop back passing attack with the use of fly motion to a go route down the sideline and they ran it twice, one for a touchdown and one for a 29 yard gain.

The play is just a basic play action sail concept with the slot receiver running the chase route (sail route) and the fly motion to go route down the sideline.

In this first clip, the route combination puts the Washington safety in a bind as he bites on the vertical sail route from the slot and takes himself out of position to play the vertical down the sideline. Receiver Robert Woods is wide open and finishes with a touchdown.

In this second clip(diagrammed above), the Rams run the exact same play but the Football Team defense is ready for the vertical with the corner playing off coverage and blanketing it deep.

But this left the sail route open as the down safety came into the box with Woodss motion. Josh Reynolds turns the safety with cut toward the post before he breaks it out toward the sideline, where Goff finds him for a nice gain.

The Rams offense is fun to study and contrast with the 49ers offense (when its firing on all cylinders), but the two teams do nearly the same things with different personnel that fit the style of offense both run. Its just unfortunate that right now, the Rams are a much more efficient team on offense than the 49ers currently are, and thats not a good thing for the 49ers right now.

More:
Anatomy of a play: Breaking down the Rams use of fly motion - Niners Nation

Anatomy

Anatomy of a Play: How the Buccaneers fooled Aaron Rodgers for a pick-six – Touchdown Wire

Aaron Rodgers came into Sundays game against the Buccaneers defense playing as well as he ever had in his first-ballot Hall of Fame career. Through Green Bays first four games and five weeks, Rodgers had thrown 13 touchdown passes and no interceptions. Hed been sacked just three times, and pressured on just 31 of his 146 dropbacks. Finally and firmly committed to the structure created by second-year head coach and offensive play-designer Matt LaFleurs system, Rodgers was having a renaissance season in which he firmly put himself in the MVP discussion. The 4-0 Packers were averaging 38 points pert game, the most in the NFL.

And then, Rodgers and the Packers went up against Tampa Bays defense, led by Todd Bowles, and it all fell apart. Rodgers completed just 16 of 35 passes for 160 yards, no touchdowns, and two interception. His quarterback rating of 35.4 was the third-worst of his career, and hes only had one other game in which he threw two interceptions and no touchdowns December 14, 2014 against the Bills in a 21-13 loss. This 38-10 embarrassment may have been worse.

How did the Buccaneers do it? With creative coverages and front packages designed by Bowles and his staff. This was completely evident on the interception Rodgers threw to cornerback Jamel Dean with 12:50 left in the first half, and the Packers up, 10-0. Obviously, Green Bay would score no further points after this as Bowles further unleashed his defensive game plan.

The first thing you should notice about this play is how the Buccaneers made the Packers wait to decipher which defensive linemen were standing up, and which had their hands on the ground. Bowles did a brilliant job from snap to snap switching this up, which made it very hard for Rodgers and his linemen to agree on protections. Rodgers was sacked five times and suffered 13 quarterback hits in this game, but it wasnt just the pressure that was the problem Rodgers was also confounded by dropping defenders and blitzing defenders from difficult angles. This caused Rodgers to doubt his short and intermediate reads as you will rarely see him do.

We were able to get after Aaron, head coach Bruce Arians said. Once we got the running game shut down it was just a matter of getting after him, and Todd did a great job with multiple looks and coverages.

On the interception in question, Dean said after the game that when receiver Davante Adams motioned from bunch right to stack left, he understood where Rodgers was likely to throw the ball to his favorite receiver.

When I saw the formation and then how everything started to develop, Im like, I have to make this play because I know whats coming.' Dean concluded. Then, once I saw him throw it, I was like yeah, its mine.

The Buccaneers had five defenders at the line of scrimmage pre-snap with what appeared to be Cover-0 behind aggressive blitz coverage with no safety help to the deep third. It was a blitz, but not the one Rodgers expected. Safety Antoine Winfield Jr. and linebacker Lavonte David dropped into coverage from the line, and cornerback Sean Murphy-Bunting blitzed from the defensive left side. Meanwhile, safeties Mike Edwards and Jordan Whitehead dropped from that alleged pre-snap Cover-0 look to two deep out of Bowles big nickel package, and Dean was more than ready to jump Adams route.

I think we needed a kick in the ass a little bit, Rodgers said after the loss. Theres a little bit of wake-up to stop feeling ourselves so much and get back to the things that got us to this position. I think this would be, unfortunately but fortunately, something we can really grow from.

That may be true, but the bigger story than the Packers possibly overlooking Tampa Bays defense is that Tampa Bays defense has become something that no opponent should ever overlook.

Originally posted here:
Anatomy of a Play: How the Buccaneers fooled Aaron Rodgers for a pick-six - Touchdown Wire

Anatomy

Video: ‘The Trial of the Chicago 7’ | Anatomy of a Scene – The New York Times

Im Aaron Sorkin, and Im the writer and the director of The Trial of the Chicago 7. Its Abbie. The scene is Abbie Hoffman on the stand. Hes being played by Sacha Baron Cohen. Frank Langella is playing Judge Julius Hoffman. He is either a terrible judge, or in the bag for the prosecution, or experiencing early senility, or some form of the three of those. The lead defense lawyer is Mark Rylance as William Kunstler a civil rights attorney at the time, who became a very well-known civil rights attorney because of this case. Abbie, do you know why youre on trial here? We carried certain ideas across state lines, not machine guns, or drugs, or little girls ideas. Its the final scene of the trial. But whats unusual is that ordinarily the last witness in a trial, thats usually the climactic scene. Somehow a lawyer breaks down that witness, and he explodes in ayou cant handle the truth kind of moment. That scene in this movie actually doesnt happen in the courtroom. It happens during a mock cross-examination that Mark Rylance as William Kunstler conducts against Tom Hayden thats Eddie Redmayne back at their offices where theyve been working. Hes trying to demonstrate to Tom Hayden why Hayden cant take the stand because theyll rip him apart, and he shows him how. That becomes the climactic courtroom scene. And the scene with Abbie on the stand is a kind of coda. Its something weve been waiting for. Its a serious Abbie telling us what he really thinks. [CHUCKLES] So Chicago was just a massive voter registration drive? The cross-examination is being done by the lead prosecutor, Richard Schultz, whos being played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. We know from the beginning of the movie that hes ambivalent about prosecuting these guys. Hes going to do it. Hes going to do it fully because that is his job, and he has been directly ordered to by the new attorney General John Mitchell. But he knows that its a mistake for a number of reasons to do it. So hes a really interesting character. And Joe plays him beautifully. It was a crazy trial. Some of the crazy was bordered on the comic and some of the crazy was tragic. So I wasnt going to try to top all those fireworks with this scene, especially because I knew that I had a final scene coming right after that, which does have a lot of fireworks. So this was going to have to be the opposite. It was going to have to be the opposite of that in the writing of it. It was going to have to be the opposite of that in Sachas performance. And it was going to have to be the opposite of that in how we shot it. It was Sachas big day. And there was still, in some peoples minds, a curiosity as to how Sacha Baron Cohen would play a dramatic scene. On this day, there was a huge crowd watching him do it. Those extras, even when the cameras were pointed away from them, stayed there because they wanted to see Sacha do this. And take after take, he would just get a huge ovation from the crowd. Part of that ovation, by the way, was for Joe Levitt too. But people were really curious about Sachas performance. They were as knocked out by it as I was, and I think the audience will be too. Do you have contempt for your government? Ill tell you, Mr. Schultz, its nothing compared to the contempt my government has for me. The night before he shot it, I sent him an email saying, just a reminder, really the creative success or the failure of the entire movie depends on your performance that youre going to give tomorrow. We can have been great up until that moment, and you still have an opportunity to sink the film with anything less than a great performance. So knock him dead, pal. I was just going to tell him the truth. For real, you cant blow this scene. Weve been trying to make this movie for 14 years. So here its all in your lap [LAUGHS] He had no problem with it at all. Im concerned you have to think about it. Give me a moment, would you friend? Ive never been on trial for my thoughts before.

Read this article:
Video: 'The Trial of the Chicago 7' | Anatomy of a Scene - The New York Times