3 ms·

I haven't seen the movie, but my understanding was that someone used some math skills to better acquire skilled players, thus making professional athletics even

I haven't seen the movie, but my understanding was that someone used some math skills to better acquire skilled players, thus making professional athletics even more of a meritocracy than it was. If I had to put a bunch of rich people on a chart with three axises of merit, luck, and inheritance, I still think professional athletes lie the closest to the pure merit line.

jacques_chester 15y ago
Nitpick: isn't inheritance a type of luck?
rdl 15y ago
Definitely professional athletics seems to be an exception, since it has a clearly defined metric for merit, and big enough rewards to picking the winners to justify global search. I'd assume at some level finance is like this; the algorithmic trading parts, not the "we went to Yale together and you have compromising pictures of me with that nun, so I'll give you this business" parts.
- TDL 15y ago
  Actually finance is a very socially oriented business. Not to the extent that you use in your example, but frankly if the M.D. doesn't like the person they spend 60 to 100 hours/week with that person will be out of a job. Same thing goes on the client side; if they don't like you, you won't get their business.
  - rdl 15y ago
    Right, but in the long run, a really obnoxious guy who is right about the market more than everyone else could probably end up running money, using other people as buffers. A small hedge fund really doesn't have a lot of overhead, so one obnoxious genius could work with 2-3 other people. There are lots of roles in finance where connections and likability are probably primary (once you pass a certain level of competence), though.
mikeryan 15y ago
The main shift in Moneyball wasn't the math per se (its there, but wasn't really the secret sauce), much of it was a shift in which metrics were actually important. Billy Beane's ranking of players was still merit based, they just measured by a different ruler.

jacques_chester 15y ago

Nitpick: isn't inheritance a type of luck?

rdl 15y ago

Definitely professional athletics seems to be an exception, since it has a clearly defined metric for merit, and big enough rewards to picking the winners to justify global search. I'd assume at some level finance is like this; the algorithmic trading parts, not the "we went to Yale together and you have compromising pictures of me with that nun, so I'll give you this business" parts.

TDL 15y ago
Actually finance is a very socially oriented business. Not to the extent that you use in your example, but frankly if the M.D. doesn't like the person they spend 60 to 100 hours/week with that person will be out of a job. Same thing goes on the client side; if they don't like you, you won't get their business.
- rdl 15y ago
  Right, but in the long run, a really obnoxious guy who is right about the market more than everyone else could probably end up running money, using other people as buffers. A small hedge fund really doesn't have a lot of overhead, so one obnoxious genius could work with 2-3 other people. There are lots of roles in finance where connections and likability are probably primary (once you pass a certain level of competence), though.

mikeryan 15y ago

The main shift in Moneyball wasn't the math per se (its there, but wasn't really the secret sauce), much of it was a shift in which metrics were actually important. Billy Beane's ranking of players was still merit based, they just measured by a different ruler.