3 ms·

> In a way, before IJS skaters were chasing overall greatness, now they chase points. I've watched a figure skating routine recently for the first time in almo

> In a way, before IJS skaters were chasing overall greatness, now they chase points. I've watched a figure skating routine recently for the first time in almost 20 years (I think the last show that I had followed was the 2006 Winter Olympics) and I was surprised to see how technical it had all become, how routine, there's no "artistry" left. It didn't use to be like this. Similar thing happened with the NBA, now everyone chases the 3-point shoots and in so doing whatever it is that had made the NBA one of the best sports shows in the world is losing its shine. In this day and age Jordan would be seen just as a gimmicky player.

ClumsyPilot 3y ago
> I was surprised to see how technical it had all become, how routine, there's no "artistry" left. It didn't use to be like this. That’s happening to, like, all of life, across the world. Beancounters have conquered the planet
bomewish 3y ago
One 'solution' for this might be just to let viewers judge. Have some kind of live voting system, and then this might change skating incentives to align closer with the aesthetic preferences of the actual audience.
- Yizahi 3y ago
  People will buy sim cards or accounts and automate spam voting.
- divan 3y ago
  And then 3000 Japanese fans outvote everyone else :) I’m looking into Eurovision judging as a curious example (half votes come from public and half from judges) :)
- Wowfunhappy 3y ago
  Viewers are not impartial. Viewer voting would mean the winning team just becomes whoever has the most fans watching.
- probably_wrong 3y ago
  That strategy is not without flaws either: once you let the public decide you create a system where the incentive is not "who skates better?" but rather "who can play the audience better?". The EuroVision Song Contest, for instance, has a well-known issue where the public often votes for/against a singer not because of their song but rather because of geopolitics [1]. And that's before we discuss organized voting rings. A related but less clear point is whether it's fair for the skater to be judged by people who have no idea about skating. If my code were to be negatively judged because (say) the person in charge judges the amount of comments rather than their content, I would probably be unhappy about that. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurovision_Song_Contest#Political_and_geographical_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurovision_Song_Contest#Politi...
- verisimi 3y ago
  Voting? That will never do!
- PeterisP 3y ago
  The original article already mentions 'leotard bias' as the problem that athletes from smaller countries face some prejudice in judging compared to the ones representing a superpower, and letting viewers judge would amplify that problem much more - it wouldn't even be about what show/PR the athlete puts on to the audience but highly influenced by global politics and what their country's leadership does.
kevinwang 3y ago
> Similar thing happened with the NBA, now everyone chases the 3-point shoots and in so doing whatever it is that had made the NBA one of the best sports shows in the world is losing its shine. In this day and age Jordan would be seen just as a gimmicky player. No part of this is true or even really makes sense.
- paganel 3y ago
  A guy like Curry is definitely quite true. He wouldn’t have been a star back in the early ‘90s, a good player, maybe, but never a star.
  - cyrialize 3y ago
    I am trying to see where you are coming from with this comment. Are you saying that Curry wouldn't have been a star due to how they played in the 90s? Or are you saying that Curry wouldn't have been a star because 90's players are much better? If it's the latter, I 100% disagree with this. The 90's definitely did not focus on 3-point shooting like there is today, but Curry has so much more going for him aside from his 3-point shot. I very much do not like the Warriors, and I'm quick to call out that the whistle is in his favor during the regular season (especially with moving screens) - but even I can recognize his skill. Additionally, refs enforce rules much more during the playoffs, and he's still won rings. Curry's off ball movement is phenomenal. Numerous players have talked about how hard it is to guard Curry because he has so much stamina. Additionally, he's in his 30s now and has had some of his best seasons for his career. If you're saying that the play style of the 90s would have held him back - I agree with that. I like the NBAs current style of fluid, "positionless" play over the 90s more rigid adherence to roles. The current NBA of today lets so many more players shine, especially dynamic bigs. Kareem has talked about this as well when watching Giannis play. I can't find the quote, so this is a paraphrase - but he was remarking how back in his day if you were tall you had to play center, and you were never allowed to practice other skills. Today's game, you have people like Jokic - a dynamic big who can facilitate, defend, AND shoot 3s. I love to see it.
- cyrialize 3y ago
  I 100% agree. The dominance of 3-point shooting has stretched the floor, causing offense to be much more dynamic. Jimmy Highroller [0], has a very good video on this where he shows that 2-point shots have become much more valuable now due to 3-pointers. To be part of a starting 5 you typically have to have the capability to shoot 3s - putting defenders in a difficult spot. You could guard the floor to prevent a 2, but that opens you up for a 3. Most people defend for a 3, so many people now are going in for a 2. I do think in the current NBA we took too much away from defenders. Most of that could be fixed with refs enforcing rules against foul baiting, allowing defenders to be more physical, etc. Refs actually do this during the playoffs, I think they should do it for the entire season. There are some good rules changes I've seen as well, like 6 in the key instead of 3. There's a good video from Rusty Buckets that goes over this [1]. I don't want to get rid of the X second in the key rule, because then teams would just have bigs sit in the paint. I think that would make everyone focus on 3-pointers even more. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/@JxmyHighroller/videos https://www.youtube.com/@JxmyHighroller/videos [1]: https://youtu.be/2E0kHY0vMQY?si=3EA3UqSGKdThF3bK https://youtu.be/2E0kHY0vMQY?si=3EA3UqSGKdThF3bK
cyrialize 3y ago
I mentioned this in other comments in the thread, but I agree with you a tiny bit in regards to offense - this video goes over it quite well by Rusty Buckets [0]. I also go over how 3-point shots have made 2-point shots more valuable. I very much disagree with your Jordan comment. I think MJ could develop a 3-point shot. If anything, I think he could have shined even more in this day and age . Today's NBA is more dynamic and "positionless" than previous rigid coaching, giving rise to players that would have otherwise been forced to play a role. Jokic & MJ, Haliburton & MJ, or even Sengun & MJ would be scary. All amazing passers that could feed the ball to MJ, but also put the offense in a bad spot. If you guard MJ, then Jokic, Haliburton, Sengun, etc. could all shoot a 3 if left wide open. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E0kHY0vMQY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E0kHY0vMQY

ClumsyPilot 3y ago

> I was surprised to see how technical it had all become, how routine, there's no "artistry" left. It didn't use to be like this. That’s happening to, like, all of life, across the world. Beancounters have conquered the planet

bomewish 3y ago

One 'solution' for this might be just to let viewers judge. Have some kind of live voting system, and then this might change skating incentives to align closer with the aesthetic preferences of the actual audience.

Yizahi 3y ago
People will buy sim cards or accounts and automate spam voting.
divan 3y ago
And then 3000 Japanese fans outvote everyone else :) I’m looking into Eurovision judging as a curious example (half votes come from public and half from judges) :)
Wowfunhappy 3y ago
Viewers are not impartial. Viewer voting would mean the winning team just becomes whoever has the most fans watching.
probably_wrong 3y ago
That strategy is not without flaws either: once you let the public decide you create a system where the incentive is not "who skates better?" but rather "who can play the audience better?". The EuroVision Song Contest, for instance, has a well-known issue where the public often votes for/against a singer not because of their song but rather because of geopolitics [1]. And that's before we discuss organized voting rings. A related but less clear point is whether it's fair for the skater to be judged by people who have no idea about skating. If my code were to be negatively judged because (say) the person in charge judges the amount of comments rather than their content, I would probably be unhappy about that. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurovision_Song_Contest#Political_and_geographical_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurovision_Song_Contest#Politi...
verisimi 3y ago
Voting? That will never do!
PeterisP 3y ago
The original article already mentions 'leotard bias' as the problem that athletes from smaller countries face some prejudice in judging compared to the ones representing a superpower, and letting viewers judge would amplify that problem much more - it wouldn't even be about what show/PR the athlete puts on to the audience but highly influenced by global politics and what their country's leadership does.

kevinwang 3y ago

> Similar thing happened with the NBA, now everyone chases the 3-point shoots and in so doing whatever it is that had made the NBA one of the best sports shows in the world is losing its shine. In this day and age Jordan would be seen just as a gimmicky player. No part of this is true or even really makes sense.

paganel 3y ago
A guy like Curry is definitely quite true. He wouldn’t have been a star back in the early ‘90s, a good player, maybe, but never a star.
- cyrialize 3y ago
  I am trying to see where you are coming from with this comment. Are you saying that Curry wouldn't have been a star due to how they played in the 90s? Or are you saying that Curry wouldn't have been a star because 90's players are much better? If it's the latter, I 100% disagree with this. The 90's definitely did not focus on 3-point shooting like there is today, but Curry has so much more going for him aside from his 3-point shot. I very much do not like the Warriors, and I'm quick to call out that the whistle is in his favor during the regular season (especially with moving screens) - but even I can recognize his skill. Additionally, refs enforce rules much more during the playoffs, and he's still won rings. Curry's off ball movement is phenomenal. Numerous players have talked about how hard it is to guard Curry because he has so much stamina. Additionally, he's in his 30s now and has had some of his best seasons for his career. If you're saying that the play style of the 90s would have held him back - I agree with that. I like the NBAs current style of fluid, "positionless" play over the 90s more rigid adherence to roles. The current NBA of today lets so many more players shine, especially dynamic bigs. Kareem has talked about this as well when watching Giannis play. I can't find the quote, so this is a paraphrase - but he was remarking how back in his day if you were tall you had to play center, and you were never allowed to practice other skills. Today's game, you have people like Jokic - a dynamic big who can facilitate, defend, AND shoot 3s. I love to see it.
cyrialize 3y ago
I 100% agree. The dominance of 3-point shooting has stretched the floor, causing offense to be much more dynamic. Jimmy Highroller [0], has a very good video on this where he shows that 2-point shots have become much more valuable now due to 3-pointers. To be part of a starting 5 you typically have to have the capability to shoot 3s - putting defenders in a difficult spot. You could guard the floor to prevent a 2, but that opens you up for a 3. Most people defend for a 3, so many people now are going in for a 2. I do think in the current NBA we took too much away from defenders. Most of that could be fixed with refs enforcing rules against foul baiting, allowing defenders to be more physical, etc. Refs actually do this during the playoffs, I think they should do it for the entire season. There are some good rules changes I've seen as well, like 6 in the key instead of 3. There's a good video from Rusty Buckets that goes over this [1]. I don't want to get rid of the X second in the key rule, because then teams would just have bigs sit in the paint. I think that would make everyone focus on 3-pointers even more. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/@JxmyHighroller/videos https://www.youtube.com/@JxmyHighroller/videos [1]: https://youtu.be/2E0kHY0vMQY?si=3EA3UqSGKdThF3bK https://youtu.be/2E0kHY0vMQY?si=3EA3UqSGKdThF3bK

cyrialize 3y ago

I mentioned this in other comments in the thread, but I agree with you a tiny bit in regards to offense - this video goes over it quite well by Rusty Buckets [0]. I also go over how 3-point shots have made 2-point shots more valuable. I very much disagree with your Jordan comment. I think MJ could develop a 3-point shot. If anything, I think he could have shined even more in this day and age . Today's NBA is more dynamic and "positionless" than previous rigid coaching, giving rise to players that would have otherwise been forced to play a role. Jokic & MJ, Haliburton & MJ, or even Sengun & MJ would be scary. All amazing passers that could feed the ball to MJ, but also put the offense in a bad spot. If you guard MJ, then Jokic, Haliburton, Sengun, etc. could all shoot a 3 if left wide open. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E0kHY0vMQY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E0kHY0vMQY