22 / DAVID FELDMAN
and yet not expend every bit of energy when throwing the punch. I am not sure whether or not it works, but those who know much more about it than I do continue to use the method and I would tend to think it has some merit.”
The more we researched this question, the more we were struck by the uncertainty of the experts about the efficacy of the snorting technique. Donald F. Hull, Jr., executive director of the International Amateur Boxing Association, the governing federation for worldwide amateur and Olympic boxing, noted that “While exhaling is important in the execution of powerful and aerobic movements, it is not as crucial in the execution of a boxing punch, but the principle is the same.” Anyone who has ever watched a Jane Fonda aerobics videotape is aware of the stress on breathing properly during aerobic training. Disciplines as disparate as weightlifting and yoga stress consciousness of inhalation and exhalation. But why couldn’t any of the boxing experts explain why, or if, snorting really helps a boxer?
Several of the authorities we spoke to recommended we contact Ira Becker, the doyen of New York’s fabled Gleason’s Gymnasium, who proved to have very strong opinions on the subject of snorting:
“When the fighter snorts, he is merely exhaling. It is a foolish action since he throws off a minimum of carbon dioxide and some vital oxygen. It is far wiser to inhale and let the lungs do [their] own bidding by getting rid of the CO2 and retaining oxygen.”
The training of boxing, more than most sports, tends to be ruled by tradition rather than by scientific research. While most aspiring boxers continue to be taught to snort, there is obviously little agreement about whether snorting actually conserves or expends energy.
WHY DO CLOCKS RUN CLOCKWISE? / 23
Why, in Any Box of Assorted Chocolates, Are the Caramels Square, the Nougats Rectangular, the Nuts Oval, and the Creams Circular?
Before we are inundated with letters, let’s square away one fact. Not all chocolatiers conform to the geometric code stated in the Imponderable above. But most do. Who invented the scheme?
Despite contacting all of the biggest chocolate makers in the United States, and some of the older smaller ones, we couldn’t come up with a definitive answer. Whether it was the venerable Thompson Candy Company in Meriden, Connecticut, See’s Candies in South San Francisco, California, or Whitman’s, all simply said that these shapes were “traditional.”
When most chocolates were dipped by hand, many companies put an easily identifiable code on each chocolate, usually in the form of a swirly script on top of each piece. At Whitman’s, for example, the code ran like this:
A “V” usually signified a vanilla cream center; flat-topped chocolates with an open “C” often indicated a chocolate butter cream center; dome-shaped chocolates inscribed with a closed
“C” would reveal a cherry cordial. Square-shaped chocolates with a “V” indicated a vanilla caramel center. An “O” stood for an orange cream; “P” for pineapple cream; and “R” for raspberry cream.
In the past, these fillings were coated with chocolate by a person who quickly dipped the centers in hot melted chocolate and then set aside the pieces to cool and solidify. Most boxed centers today are coated with an automatic enrober. Charlotte H. Connelly, of Whitman’s, describes the process:
In the enrobing process, candy centers are arranged on a moving belt which passes over a pool of chocolate which coats the underside. Then the centers move under a curtain of chocolate which coats each piece with precisely the right amount of melted chocolate…. In many instances, with the demise of the hand-dipper, the individual codes have ceased to exist. Although the shapes are
24 / DAVID FELDMAN
used by many confectionary manufacturers, this is certainly not industrywide as many boxed chocolates suppliers do not conform to these patterns.
How right she is. Most of Fanny Farmer’s creams, for example, are circular, but their cream caramels and walnut creams are square.
See’s Candies produces approximately 130 different pieces of confection. And although each piece does have an individual marking, only the most diehard customer could possibly commit them all to memory.
What the world is clamoring for is a visual guidebook to chocolate centers, to stop the needless despair caused when an innocent person selects a nougat when he thinks he has chosen a caramel. Excuse us, while we call our edito….
Submitted by Mrs. Marjorie S. Fener, of Hempstead, New York.
Whatever Happened to Pay Toilets?
Going to the bathroom is one of the few activities that has gotten cheaper of late. Pay toilets used to be the rule in airports and bus and train stations, and one would often encounter them in gas stations and restaurants.
Pay toilets were never meant to be profit-making enterprises, but merely a method to help defray the costs of cleaning the bathrooms.
It was presumed that the dime or quarter “entrance fee” would mo-tivate users to keep the pay stalls cleaner.
WHY DO CLOCKS RUN CLOCKWISE? / 25
It didn’t work, though, for instead of encouraging users to exercise best behavior, bathrooms with pay toilets were often trashed by angry patrons.
The vast majority of pay toilets in the 1950s and 1960s were operated by municipalities. According to Ben Castellano of the Federal Aviation Administration, the small amount of revenue generated by pay toilets in airports simply was not worth the attendant hassles: the numerous complaints about their presence and the constantly broken locks that rendered toilets unusable.
But the real death knell of the pay toilet came with several lawsuits filed against municipalities by women’s groups. Pay toilets were sexually discriminatory, they argued, because women, unlike men, were forced to pay to urinate. Instead of putting women on the honor code or installing human or video monitors, most cities relented and abandoned the pay toilet. Even male chauvinists were forced to admit that the women’s movement had struck a blow for humankind.
26 / DAVID FELDMAN
When a Pothole Is Formed on the Road, Why Don’t We See the Displaced Concrete?
Of course, the endless procession of automobiles and trucks weakens concrete, but the real culprit in the creation of potholes is moisture.
Potholes are usually formed when moisture penetrates the pavement.
Combined with the destructive effects of alternating cycles of freeze and thaw, especially in the spring, and various chemicals, moisture weakens the concrete from within.
Eugene W. Robbins, president of the Texas Good Roads/Transportation Association, gave us the most succinct explanation of what happens to the “missing” concrete: “When the pothole forms, the material is broken loose, is pulverized or thrown to the side of the road by vehicle tires, and is blown away by wind or washed away by rain.”
Submitted by Chuck Appeldoorn, of Woodbury, Minnesota.
Why Do Most Cities in the United States Put a Maximum-Height Restriction on a Fence a Homeowner May Put Around His Residence, and How Do They Decide on the Maximum?
Our Imponderables research team looked into this pesky problem and found that virtually all cities have local ordinances defining maximum heights for fences in residential neighborhoods. Are these restrictions fussy and capricious?
Before we can answer this Imponderable, we must not shrink from asking, without trepidation, the Big Question: what WHY DO CLOCKS RUN CLOCKWISE? / 27
is the purpose of a fence? There are at least six common reasons why homeowners erect fences:
1. To block visual access to their property 2. To demarcate property lines
3. To inhibit access by unwanted people or animals 4. To protect property from the elements
5. To improve climatic conditions (particularly, to break up strong winds)
6. To enhance the appearance of the property We can all agree, then, that the fence is a noble and worthwhile institution. So why can’t homeowners build them to their preferred height specifications?
Because fences also cause proble
ms. Enormous problems. And problems relating to their height are high on the list, all considerations in the decision to codify height restrictions: 1. High fences are a safety hazard. This is the number one reason why most localities enact restrictive ordinances. High fences at intersections or near driveways obstruct the vision of motorists and pedestrians. Fences of more than three feet near driveways are particularly dangerous, for they block the view of small children. Most cities also severely restrict the height of fences in the front of corner houses.
2. As any regular viewer of The People’s Court or regular reader of Ann Landers can testify, neighbors constantly fight about fences.
They fight about how high they are, what color they are, whose property they are on, and whose responsibility it is to maintain them.
Many fences are built solely to irritate neighbors; these are called
“spite fences.” Without zoning ordinances, municipal governments were without the means to settle such disputes.
3. Fences can block or obstruct the view, the available light, and the air flow of adjoining properties. Just as the construction of a skyscraper can totally disrupt the surrounding en 28 / DAVID FELDMAN
vironment, so can a relatively low fence in a residential neighborhood.
4. Many people feel that fences are ugly. But try to argue this point with a neighbor who has built a fence solely to secure more privacy.
5. Fences can change the feel of a neighborhood. Nothing warms up Elm Street like a nice six-foot high barbed wire topped electric chain-link fence.
6. The same fence that diminishes wind in the winter blocks out cool breezes for the homeowner AND HIS NEIGHBOR during the summer.
The next-door neighbor becomes a passive victim of the fence.
You can imagine, then, the quandary that the city planner faces when trying to determine the proper height levels for residential fences. Zoning ordinances must regulate not only the height of fences, but their degree of openness, which materials can be used to construct fences, how a fence is defined, and how these regulations are to be enforced.
Laws must be enacted to allow homeowners to build fences without receiving permission from abutting neighbors, or the city risks needless delays and squabbles. And laws must be written to provide for exceptions. Fences around tennis courts, for example, must be built higher than other residential fences or there will be safety risks to neighbors and some rather angry tennis players. In mixed-use zones, the law must discriminate between commercial and residential property. The risk of children or criminals climbing into dangerous factories or near hazardous substances far outweighs the aesthetic damage done by a high fence.
So have a little compassion for these zoning ordinances, as arbitrary as they may seem. Sheaves of material sent by the American Planning Association indicate that planners are trying to give you a break. For example, in most localities, fences in side-and backyards are allowed to be higher than in front yards, WHY DO CLOCKS RUN CLOCKWISE? / 29
because high fences in less public territory pose less of a safety risk.
Corner houses are likely to face the most restrictions. In Salt Lake City, for example, fences within thirty feet of an intersection or on any corner lot can be built no higher than three feet. A Coral Gables, Florida, ordinance restricts walls or fences to three feet high if they are within twenty feet of a street or alley intersection. Other cities also restrict any other structure, man-made or natural, from blocking visual access near an intersection.
As crime rates have escalated in surburban as well as urban neighborhoods, many cities have raised their height limits, often from four to six feet. Many residents feel more secure with a high fence around the perimeter of their property. Los Angeles has even considered upping its maximum height from six to eight feet for this very reason.
While the current trend is toward higher fences, don’t wait for deregulation to hit local ordinances. High fences are still considered by most property associations to be eyesores and can adversely affect the property value of a single home or a whole neighborhood. When the subject of property values rears its ugly head, other considerations often have a way of fading from view.
Submitted by Bert Sailer, of Los Angeles, California.
30 / DAVID FELDMAN
Why Do Your Feet Swell Up So Much in Airplanes?
We talked to two specialists in aviation medicine who assured us that there is no reason why atmospheric changes in airplanes would cause feet to swell. Both assured us that the reason your feet swell up on a plane is the same reason they swell up on the ground—inactivity.
Your heart is not the only organ in the body that acts as a pump; so do the muscles of the legs. Walking or flexing a leg muscle assists the pumping effect. On a plane, you are not only confined in movement but sitting with the legs perpendicular to the floor. If you sit for prolonged periods without muscular activity, blood and other fluids collect in the foot with the assistance of gravity.
It doesn’t really matter whether you leave your shoes on or off during periods of inactivity. If left on, they will provide ex WHY DO CLOCKS RUN CLOCKWISE? / 31
ternal support, but they will inhibit circulation, feel tight—and will not prevent feet from swelling, in any case. If you take your shoes off, you will feel more comfortable, but you’ll have a tough time putting your shoes back on, and most of us don’t take our shoehorns along on planes.
The pooling of fluids in the feet can happen just as easily in a bus, a train, or an office. Most people’s feet swell during the day, which is why the American Podiatric Association recommends buying shoes during the middle of the afternoon. Many people require a shoe a half size to a full size larger in the afternoon than when they wake up.
If your feet swelling becomes a problem, consider airplane aerobics. A few laps around a wide-body plane will do wonders for your feet and will build up your appetite for that wholesome and delicious airplane meal that awaits you.
Submitted by Christal Henner, of New York, New York.
Why Are Hamburger-Bun Bottoms So Thin?
An irate caller from Champaign, Illinois, hit us with this Imponderable, and we immediately empathized. Who hasn’t taken a juicy burger off the barbecue, placed a Bermuda onion, some ketchup, maybe a dollop of mustard on the patty, only to find the bun bottom wilting in his fingertips? The bun top only gets mangled by the fingertips of the eater. The bottom carries the weight of the burger, the bun, the eater’s fingers, plus the grease from the meat itself. Halfway through eating the sandwich, the bun top looks like Grace Kelly; the bun bottom looks like Sam Kinison.
All of the commercial retail bakeries we spoke to were eager 32 / DAVID FELDMAN
to fault the slicers. Of course, all commercial slicers come with ad-justable blades, so the bun could be sliced at any height. Surely, not all hamburger buns are missliced, so why don’t they slice them higher?
We did find some explanations for the mystery of the puny bun bottom. Most hamburger buns purchased in the grocery store are approximately one and a quarter inches high. They are baked in molds that are half an inch high. Many bakeries slice the bun at this half-inch mark rather than the true midpoint. This is necessary because the tops of the hamburger buns puff up (three-quarters of an inch above the mold), and the top is relatively fragile. The lowest point of this fragile area is called the “shred line.” Slices made above the shred line tend to be less clean. One of the reasons that the bottoms of McDonald’s Big Mac buns stand up so well is that they are baked in one-inch molds, producing a higher shred line, so that they can be sliced at a proportionately higher point.
The hamburger-bun tops are, in fact, much more important from a marketing point of view. Nothing pleases browsers at the bakery shelf more than buns with a pronounced mushroom top. Because the mushroom top is above the shred line, bakers must decide between good looks and practicality when it comes time to slice the buns—guess which one they choose.
B. W. Crosby, of Pepperidge Farm, adds that “The f
lavor and texture of the bun comes from the top; therefore, the top needs to be substantial in size.” Although the ingredients on the top of the bun are identical to those on the bottom, there is some substance to this argument. The sugar in the dough caramelizes on the top of the bun during baking (that’s why the top of the bun is browner than the rest), adding some flavor to what is essentially an exceptionally bland product. Any other flavor enhancements, such as sesame seeds or onions, are also generally loaded on the top of the bun.
One bun expert we spoke to, Bill Keogh of American Bakeries, offered a unique and practical solution to the bun bottom crisis.
When he eats a large, juicy hamburger and anticipates a WHY DO CLOCKS RUN CLOCKWISE? / 33
potential problem, he simply turns over the hamburger and eats it bun-bottom up. The so-called bun top, now on the bottom, easily soaks up any footloose grease, for not only is it heavier, it is also wider; thus he simultaneously solves the common problem of trying to eat a sandwich when the patty is wider than the bun bottom. This type of ingenuity is what separates us from the anthropoids.
Why Do Golfers Yell “Fore” When Warning of an Errant Golf Shot?
This expression, popularized by former President Gerald Ford, actually started as an English military term. When the troops were firing in lines, the command “’ware before” indicated that it might be prudent for the front line to kneel so that the second line wouldn’t blow their heads off.
Why do Clocks run clockwise? Page 4
