3 ms·

"There is a very variable gap between novice, amateur and professional in different sports - and I think the closer to "natural human movement" the sport is the

by rsync 9y ago

"There is a very variable gap between novice, amateur and professional in different sports - and I think the closer to "natural human movement" the sport is the greater the gap." I find your comment interesting but I am not so sure it is correct ... I have heard it convincingly argued that hitting a major league pitcher is as difficult a task to complete as anything else in sports - and it appears to be true. The gap between someone who can do that and everyone else is huge and also appears to be innate - either you can do that or you can't. And yet, it's a completely arbitrary action that has no real relation to natural movements. Also, as long as I'm picking apart your argument - skiing has all kinds of specialized, unnatural equipment (like a hockey goalie) and it is not a natural movement ... and yet if you picked a random spectator from the crowd to make it down the super G, they might fare even worse than your spectator for the footrace.

lifeisstillgood 9y ago
I think those are similar arguments - there are some sports (NHL, skiing) that are just difficult - the bar is high immediately just to be able to take part. These sports seem to have a smaller gap between the lowest performer and the top players - either because anyone able to compete at all is already quite good, or as i suspect, that the top players are not as good at say hockey, as the top sprinters are at running - partly because you are selecting from a smaller population, partly because (and this is my point) there is still a long way for humans to go to manage the skills - Usain Bolt is considered to be near the limits of human performance (what is physically possible with levers the length of a human thigh etc) - but that is not the case with ice skates etc how shall i put this ? Moneyball teaches us that baseball is unlikely to be the only sport that would see huge gains by rejecting industry machismo. Could NHL see gains from basic changes? yes. Do i know what those are ? No.
lifeisstillgood 9y ago
Let's redo this. I can happily imagine that every child in the USA gets to find out if they are any good at hitting a baseball (#). So we can be fairly sure that the population of possible baseball picks is as wide as it can be - and is a proper bell curve. But the population of those who have had chance to skate on ice and hit a puck is, even in canada, is not as wide as possible- so it won't be a bell curve - maybe double hump? this gives us in my head a situation where even the top players in NHL are not the best possible from the whole country - but the baseball players are closer to that ideal because they draw from a more complete bell curve. as such i speculate that NHL top players are not as good as possible because - the top players are not the best possible from population compared to say sprinting - the set of all players is more closely grouped (thinner curve) so any player is closer in ability to top players than say sprinting - most sports probably still have plenty of "moneyball" left on the table All of which is a long winded way of saying, if there is a sport where a non-professional can come in and perform distinguishedly, then there should be plenty of scope for investment and improvement and so consequent profit (wins at any rate) (#) every male child at least, but let's not go down that road now.
- rsync 9y ago
  "I can happily imagine that every child in the USA gets to find out if they are any good at hitting a baseball (#). So we can be fairly sure that the population of possible baseball picks is as wide as it can be - and is a proper bell curve." That's a very good point - thanks. I suppose the same point could be made, even more emphatically, for skiing. "most sports probably still have plenty of "moneyball" left on the table" Actually, I reject the Moneyball principle and its prescriptions, but that's another story ...
- kgilpin 9y ago
  Hockey is more popular in Canada than baseball is in the USA!

by rsync 9y ago

lifeisstillgood 9y ago

I think those are similar arguments - there are some sports (NHL, skiing) that are just difficult - the bar is high immediately just to be able to take part. These sports seem to have a smaller gap between the lowest performer and the top players - either because anyone able to compete at all is already quite good, or as i suspect, that the top players are not as good at say hockey, as the top sprinters are at running - partly because you are selecting from a smaller population, partly because (and this is my point) there is still a long way for humans to go to manage the skills - Usain Bolt is considered to be near the limits of human performance (what is physically possible with levers the length of a human thigh etc) - but that is not the case with ice skates etc how shall i put this ? Moneyball teaches us that baseball is unlikely to be the only sport that would see huge gains by rejecting industry machismo. Could NHL see gains from basic changes? yes. Do i know what those are ? No.

lifeisstillgood 9y ago

Let's redo this. I can happily imagine that every child in the USA gets to find out if they are any good at hitting a baseball (#). So we can be fairly sure that the population of possible baseball picks is as wide as it can be - and is a proper bell curve. But the population of those who have had chance to skate on ice and hit a puck is, even in canada, is not as wide as possible- so it won't be a bell curve - maybe double hump? this gives us in my head a situation where even the top players in NHL are not the best possible from the whole country - but the baseball players are closer to that ideal because they draw from a more complete bell curve. as such i speculate that NHL top players are not as good as possible because - the top players are not the best possible from population compared to say sprinting - the set of all players is more closely grouped (thinner curve) so any player is closer in ability to top players than say sprinting - most sports probably still have plenty of "moneyball" left on the table All of which is a long winded way of saying, if there is a sport where a non-professional can come in and perform distinguishedly, then there should be plenty of scope for investment and improvement and so consequent profit (wins at any rate) (#) every male child at least, but let's not go down that road now.

rsync 9y ago
"I can happily imagine that every child in the USA gets to find out if they are any good at hitting a baseball (#). So we can be fairly sure that the population of possible baseball picks is as wide as it can be - and is a proper bell curve." That's a very good point - thanks. I suppose the same point could be made, even more emphatically, for skiing. "most sports probably still have plenty of "moneyball" left on the table" Actually, I reject the Moneyball principle and its prescriptions, but that's another story ...
kgilpin 9y ago
Hockey is more popular in Canada than baseball is in the USA!