3 ms·

All of these criticisms miss Gladwell's point. The point isn't the full court press. It's that the teams that were beaten by the full court press thought it bro

All of these criticisms miss Gladwell's point. The point isn't the full court press. It's that the teams that were beaten by the full court press thought it broke some sort of unwritten rule of youth basketball that supposedly reads, "don't full court press". The whole point of the article is that in areas of competition or warfare, very often, one side lives (and sometimes dies) by obeying rules that don't actually exist. Goliath thought that, win or lose, the battle should happen hand to hand and David knew to use a sling and a rock to his advantage. When one side is playing by a certain set of rules that the other side doesn't have to acknowledge, then the side with fewer rules has an advantage. That's the point.

trapper 17y ago
As someone who has coached basketball I call B.S. You don't put on a press because if you are playing against a team that knows how to beat it you will get destroyed because they will run you into the ground. It's a suboptimal strategy because of this. What he is essentially saying is that in any two team dynamic system you can gain a short term advantage by playing the suboptimal strategy. In this case it's not going to work next year, because most teams will train how to beat it. It's like telling your military to charge the opposition. This may surprise them, and you might win, because the opposition isn't expecting it. But next time don't expect it to work.
- foulmouthboy 17y ago
  I'm talking about the original Gladwell article. In the original article, Gladwell points out that there are rules that competitors limit themselves to despite the fact that they aren't explicitly laid out. The coaches of other teams were upset at this particular team because, as they put it, it's unfair to keep using a full court press against 12 year old girls. The other example Gladwell referenced was of a naval simulation primarily played by people well versed in military strategy. While most players used traditional strategies seen throughout history, one player found that the optimal strategy was something that would never work in real life, but was totally feasible within the rules of the game. The other players cried foul because he went against the "spirit" of the game, despite not breaking any rules. Again, the point of the article: The best way to win is to not limit yourself by rules that don't exist. [edit] I realize we're talking about two different things. I don't really have an opinion either way in regards to running the full court press more often at other levels of competitive basketball. I still think people are missing the point of the original article, and Gladwell isn't helping himself by going on about the full court press thing.
  - trapper 17y ago
    There are two ways you can interpret this: - rules that competitors limit themselves to despite the fact that they aren't explicitly laid out - don't train to defend against the suboptimal strategy While the correct answer may be the first, logic suggests it's the latter, as it's much simpler. I think that in jumping from his evidence to his conclusion he missed the point.
  - llimllib 17y ago
    I don't understand why Gladwell seems to be the only person that gets a free pass to make totally illogical arguments, but have hundreds of smart people say "oh, well sure, the argument sucks, but you're missing the point".

trapper 17y ago

As someone who has coached basketball I call B.S. You don't put on a press because if you are playing against a team that knows how to beat it you will get destroyed because they will run you into the ground. It's a suboptimal strategy because of this. What he is essentially saying is that in any two team dynamic system you can gain a short term advantage by playing the suboptimal strategy. In this case it's not going to work next year, because most teams will train how to beat it. It's like telling your military to charge the opposition. This may surprise them, and you might win, because the opposition isn't expecting it. But next time don't expect it to work.

foulmouthboy 17y ago
I'm talking about the original Gladwell article. In the original article, Gladwell points out that there are rules that competitors limit themselves to despite the fact that they aren't explicitly laid out. The coaches of other teams were upset at this particular team because, as they put it, it's unfair to keep using a full court press against 12 year old girls. The other example Gladwell referenced was of a naval simulation primarily played by people well versed in military strategy. While most players used traditional strategies seen throughout history, one player found that the optimal strategy was something that would never work in real life, but was totally feasible within the rules of the game. The other players cried foul because he went against the "spirit" of the game, despite not breaking any rules. Again, the point of the article: The best way to win is to not limit yourself by rules that don't exist. [edit] I realize we're talking about two different things. I don't really have an opinion either way in regards to running the full court press more often at other levels of competitive basketball. I still think people are missing the point of the original article, and Gladwell isn't helping himself by going on about the full court press thing.
- trapper 17y ago
  There are two ways you can interpret this: - rules that competitors limit themselves to despite the fact that they aren't explicitly laid out - don't train to defend against the suboptimal strategy While the correct answer may be the first, logic suggests it's the latter, as it's much simpler. I think that in jumping from his evidence to his conclusion he missed the point.
- llimllib 17y ago
  I don't understand why Gladwell seems to be the only person that gets a free pass to make totally illogical arguments, but have hundreds of smart people say "oh, well sure, the argument sucks, but you're missing the point".