RoR: Forum

> "gymnastic floor events" [. . . ] are really modern jazz dance

SO not true!! How could you denigrate the tumbling passes like that?!

That is, unless you're talking about rhythmic gymnastics. Then maybe. But that's usually more ballet-like than jazz-like, anyway. ; )

Post 1

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 6:28am

Other than the consistent general theme of "sports," this article is simply mildly denigrating opinion-laden vomitus. It is not particularly relevant or interesting to learn what sports he likes and dislikes, especially given his off-the-cuff pop-Objectivist spin on why sports he doesn't like are 'evil' or less rational. Sometimes, a post or two of his make me consider him a reasoned thinker. Usually though, he uses his mind as a bauble to justify his personal preferences, as in this article.

Post 2

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 7:02am

Scott, I think that many of Mike's statements need to be read with an implied 'many Objectivists believe that' or 'it is often claimed that'. Given his general writing style this makes more sense to me and is how I understand many of his statements. His purpose frequently seems to be to point out unstated and implicit assumptions. He wants the reader to think about what he writes, not just quickly agree or disagree.

Post 3

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 7:55am

I take Michael's articles as humour. Really, he can be quite amusing, I don't think he intends to make a serious point.

However, I want to challenge the notion of sport being necessary for a healthy mind.

In Germany and Austria, Winston Churchill (died at 87) is often quoted as having said his secret to longevity and good health was drinking whiskey, smoking cigars and no sports. Has anyone else heard of this quote before? I think he is supposed to have said it in Parliament, but the quote is generally never mentioned in Anglo-Saxon countries (I wonder why?).

There is also a related saying in German, it is "Sport ist mord". Translated means "Sport is murder".

Funny, you would think that Germans must hate sports more than most other nations. On the other hand, NZ and Australia are the most sport-addicted nations I have ever seen. So, what does that tell us about corresponding sense of life?

I do row weekly on the river (coxed four) here in Oxford though. We have raced against other clubs as well. It keeps me fit :-)

Post 4

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 8:01am

Marcus, I don't think he was being humorous at all, I believe he is being sarcastically contemptuous of sports in general; with an eye of denigrating the achievements and popularity of those that excel at them.

Marotta, has no idea what he is talking about. His ignorance of sports is surpassed only by his obvious contempt for it. Marotta�s main complaint is that sports penalize and a reward unequal physical and mental attributes; in essence, Marotta�s problem with sports, is that it is not egalitarian.

MM: To me, a good sport demands many skills, rewards individual effort, rewards agility rather than aggression, demands intelligence, insight, and foresight, and rewards memory and integration. A good sport does not penalize for physical size and can be played equally well by men and women together.

By that reasoning, 90% of sports are not "good" sports. You use the term "penalize" as if there was something inherently unfair about a particular sport "rewarding" a specific physical attribute (size, speed, agility, and so on). In my youth I was pretty damn good baseball player, on the other hand I was crap at football; funny enough, I never felt particularly "penalized" because my physical attributes and skills were better suited to one sport over another. The bitter tone of your article makes me wonder, were you bullied a lot during school PE, or in the neighborhood recreation centers?

MM: Billiards and bowling require little physical skill and almost no mental alertness. One of their peculiar advantages is that they can be played drunk. Everyone I know who shoots pool in a bar (including me) says that he does it better after a couple of drinks.

Nonsense, absolute total nonsense. In an abstract sense, billiards is a form of geometry. However, I do agree that some people do in fact, shoot pool better after a few drinks; people with little talent and low confidence levels often play sports a little better when the booze can pitch hit for their lack of nerve.

MM: Golf demands the precise performance of one very limited skill: hitting a ball with a stick. The ball is not even moving. Rather than walking, you ride in a cart or you pay some kid to haul your stuff for you. The courses are poisoned with herbicides and insecticides.

Golf is recognized as one of the single most demanding and difficult of all sports to master, both physically and mentally. The physical and mental skill level it takes to master this sport is enormous; which explains why so many professional athletes from other sports are drawn to golf: for many, golf is the ultimate test of focused mind/body control.

MM: In fact, American football is probably evil. Essentially a form of military combat, with defensive and offensive "squads" and tactical "platoons," American football divides labor into mindless repetitions of linemen bashing each other while executioners blitz the backfield. After everyone is dead on the ground, all play stops�no need for players to tire themselves out. ... and the plays are supposedly complicated if one follows all the scribbles on the TV screen�you huddle before each play to get your orders, and needn't worry about having to think for yourself."

Evil? American football is a form of "chess" played out on an actual field, with actual human beings taking the part of the chess pieces, and a coach as the decision maker of the next "move". Few other sports can highlight in a single play, such a vast array of specialized skills being performed at their highest level. The blocking of the "huge" linemen in the face of extreme pressure, allowing the throwing of a football with perfect timing and accuracy, in order to be caught by a fast and agile receiver with ballet like grace; and all of this is dictated by the chess-masters (the coach) mental ability to 'outwit' the other chess master next move(s) while keeping an eye on the board (field). On the field itself, each and every player must think and adjust from play to play, or the coach's overall strategy will fail. Of course, I suspect, that what really bothers you is the military terminology and undertones; I am not surprised.

MM: Basketball has a few virtues. Its main shortfall is that only a narrow set of skills is needed to play. ... Although running, dribbling, passing, and shooting are a good mix, and the constant running is demanding, the ease of the game is the reason that scores like 112-110 are common.

Once again you are speaking out of total ignorance. Scores of that type are NOT common, but uncommon. As to it's main shortfall of, "needing only a narrow set of skills to play", you obviously never watched a Michael Jordan play. This basketball player was arguably, the greatest athlete that ever lived.

By the way, Michael, you forgot boxing: which I am sure you find �abhorrent�.

However, in your article you did say something I wholly agree with, you said, �Your relationship with yourself defines what you will find inspiring.� Very true, Michael, your article was very revealing of your relationship to yourself, and what you find inspiring.

George

(Edited by George W. Cordero on 8/03, 9:03am)

Post 5

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 9:24am

Well done George.

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 10:32am

Most folks here came down hard on Michael. In a fit of psycho-babble, I will attempt to defend him.

I, like many others here, have felt the sting of Michael's words. He is smart enough to make it seem like he's an expert at everything he talks about -- that is, until he crosses an expert qua expert, on a given topic.

Michael recently crossed me (an expert in human nutrition) when he argued that ape diets are merely different in degree (and not in kind) from human diets -- which contradicts the opposite gut physiologies between the species. Knowing that I was dealing with a man who had not spent 1000+ hours of his life studying this particular topic -- I FORGAVE HIM.

My point is that every limitation is a strength overdone (this is the psycho-babble part, mentioned above). And every strength imposes limitation on application or direction. A soft flower petal makes for an awful hammer (though each are of value to humans). A 350-lb offensive lineman, and a jockey -- ought to never attempt to trade places. They are each good at -- or good for -- something special (ie. a difference in kind).

Just as Michael shouldn't judge individual athletes for their (lack of) focus on one trait versus another -- so too, we ought not judge Michael so harshly for using his mind, just to see how fast it can go.

His mind is like a powerful dragster -- and I appreciate that. Like all powerful dragsters, control of all that horsepower can be lost quite easily, leading to a crash & burn -- and I can accept that. If we get too close to the track when he's burning rubber, then we ought to be mindful of his unbridled power, and its potentially destructive nature to us -- and I can tolerate that.

Whether I am appreciating, accepting, or tolerating him and his colorful thoughts -- I realize that interaction with him will spark growth in me (because his mind is powerful enough to challenge me). Time will tell if he himself accepts similar challenges and grows from them -- but we need this passed time (and the perspective it offers) in order to judge folks better.

Caveat: Now, if Michael starting directing the power of his mind toward, say, a pseudo-justification of altruist-collectivism -- then I'd be singing an entirely different tune (Taps), and I'd be up in the front of the pack calling for a spiritual lynching.

Ed

Post 7

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 1:08pm

Michael Marotta wrote:

Table tennis and miniature golf also fail to challenge and reward the whole person.

You obviously haven't played competitive ping-pong! :)

Post 8

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 1:55pm

Michael's is the immigrant grandmother view of sports. He's seen a few minutes of each on TV, on mute, and has therefore seen ball go into a basket, a small ball roll into a cup, a bunch of husky men hit each other and stop, and so on. Therefore, he can utter such inanities as "football players don't tire" (it was only last year that one NFL lineman died of dehydration in training camp, and one in college?). He would have no clue that the big fat offensive linemen have to be the smartest people on the team -- just check the GPAs on any college squad -- due to all the patterns they must know. It wouldn't occur to him that if football was so mindless, there would hardly be the need for a team to have 20 different coaches.

Generally, admittedly-ignorant humorous rants can be fun, but I've never found my immigrant grandmother's complaints about sports entertaining.

Alec

Post 9

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 2:07pm

Alec said of football: "He would have no clue that the big fat offensive linemen have to be the smartest people on the team -- just check the GPAs on any college squad -- due to all the patterns they must know."

Alec is right, there is a required type of intelligence for football. I used to play up until high school, and though I was one of the smart kids in school, I couldn't follow the plays to save my life. (I played defensive line, so luckily all I had to do was hit the man with the ball.) But the so-called dumb jocks had to know the plays, and remember pattern formations, had to plan ahead like chess, even. (Someone already made the comparison of football to chess.) I think it also requires the ability for spacial projection, which requires geometry, and basic math (all those yards!).

Post 10

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 3:35pm

Hehe, what an Opi�ata, and what lack of fair play and sportsmanship that we refuse to be blindfolded while beating it with sticks.... besides maybe the few that seem to be beating its creator.

I too take it as humour. Though "Taking fun as simply fun, and earnestness in earnest, shows how thoroughly thou none of the two discernest."

Big money spectator sports i would categorize as entertainment business, in which sport merely serves as alibi. It should be judged on its ability to entertain, and whatever you and I might think, then it has proven its ability to do so.

On sports in general, whatever makes anyone happy, at the expense of nobody else, must be, by definition, good.

The complete sentence; "Orandum est ut sit mens sana in corpore sano," would curiously seem to better reflect your points. That your wizard of Menlo park lived to be 82, proves as little or as much as the fact that Kurt G�del killed himself by starvation. John Nash was severely schizophrenic, Descartes died of pneumonia, Christian Doppler died of a pulmonary disease, Julia Robinson died of leukemia... the list seems endless...

Personally i'm no sports-creature, but "Mens sana in corpore sano" i do hold as true - as a business owner i can't afford to sit idle for too long, so when our daughter died, i needed a kick in the butt to get back into action, i asked my doctor for a mild antidepressant (if i recall correctly it was Cipralex), i tried it out for two weeks but found that it needed bigger problems than i could master, for its side-effects to be acceptable, so i dropped it and turned to sports.

The few sports that i do enjoy includes downhill skiing, badminton and cycling, so for something i should be able do every day and to whatever extend i should find necessary, i dug out my velocipede from under the empty beer cans, and operation 'healthy mind in aching body' was in motion.

And believe me, it worked wonders. The release of endorphins, epinephrine (adrenaline), serotonin and whichever other neurotransmitters that showered my brain, convincingly outperformed what the doctor prescribed. Of course it came with a price; i had to accept that i wouldn't get headaches, not to mention the addition of side-effects like increased sex drive, enthusiasm... lust for life, but i came to accept those terms.

"Mens sana in corpore sano" - one could also strive for an unhealthy mind, or an unhealthy body, it would just seem slightly silly.

I didn't agree much with your article, but for some reason i liked reading it - i wasn't more than half way through before i had this image of a small room, two computers opposite each other, you typing away on one keyboard, Andy Rooney typing away on the other, tossing opinions back and forth, supporting a medium-sized metropolis on hot air.

I hope you can read that with a smile on your face, as that was how it was intended. Though "Taking fun as simply fun, and earnestness in earnest, shows how thoroughly thou none of the two discernest."

Post 11

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 8:37pm

Can't bring myself to read the article. Too nauseating. Some comments are interesting though, especially those about IQs of linemen. Sports are obligatory for all kids, IMO. I am quite fascist about it. ;-)

Post 12

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 11:07pm

Anybody who realises the outstanding rationality of Australian Football, that "the game demands a fluid intelligence in space and time," can't be all bad. :-)

Post 13

Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - 10:49pm

All sports are not created equal. Billiards and bowling require little physical skill and almost no mental alertness. One of their peculiar advantages is that they can be played drunk. Everyone I know who shoots pool in a bar (including me) says that he does it better after a couple of drinks. In the movie The Hustler, even Minnesota Fats downs a shot to help his game. Bowling is another game that gets better with beer.

While this statement about "almost no mental alertness" being required may perhaps be applicable to bowling, it most certainly is not to billiards. If one looks past it as simply a "bar game", like throwing darts or shuffle board, one will find that there is a great deal of strategy, planning ahead, and mental aspects involved. One must weigh his opponents ability, e.g. Notice if they struggle with long shots; Notice if they can't do jump shots and/or masses; If he's irascible, then you should play a lot of safeties; etc. One who's able to play for position will typically plan at least 3 balls ahead. Not to mention the level of concentration, coordination, and muscle control that is involved with shot-making.

I second what the above individual said about alcohol "pitch-hitting" for self-confidence in some lads, but that certainly shant be enough reason to reject the sport entirely. I would argue that Billiards is one of the (if not the) most mental sports there is!

If this was intended to be humorous... I didn't really find it so. But I do thank the author for the catalyst to thought in my head, making me think of sports on a more objective level, rather than mindless physical activities.

Post 14

Thursday, August 4, 2005 - 12:25am

Mr. Marotta neglected to mention that Lance Armstrong is just a wannabe athlete, because all Lance does is ride a bicycle.

Post 15

Thursday, August 4, 2005 - 2:52am

We shall rip out their tongue, so they shall speak no more unspeakable words, they shall no longer question the heroes we so eagerly follow, for theirs are the shadow in which we shall clear our minds of unhealthy thoughts.

We shall rip out their tongue, and burn them in public. They shall perish in an olympic fire, for suggesting to us that the impurity of thought should be held higher than our collective praise of physical form. They shall perish in an eternal flame that we can commemorate our groups of heroes their noble deeds.

They shall be no brother of ours.

Post 16

Thursday, August 4, 2005 - 3:11am

Everyone I know who shoots pool in a bar (including me) says that he does it better after a couple of drinks.

The implicit assumption here is that when a "man" drinks alcohol he is no longer mentally alert.

I recently read in the newspaper that it was found that "moderate" alcohol consumption in men keeps them more mentally alert. However, that is not the case for women.

Anyway. I agree that both pool and billiards to be played well require physical and mental co-ordination, strategic planning and a good feel for geometry.

Soren,

Are you standing in for Marotta at the moment? If you changed the name on your post #15 to his, it would not look out of place ;-)

Post 17

Thursday, August 4, 2005 - 4:52am

Marcus,

Soren, Are you standing in for Marotta at the moment? If you changed the name on your post #15 to his, it would not look out of place ;-)

Only Marotta can be Marotta. I do not stand in for anyone, but i do stand up for something.

If the cup is half empty, we can find many points in his post to criticize, and we have - mine in #10.

If on the other hand the cup is half full, then maybe it is a fair question, if we look past the individual examples, to ask why we should advocate improving the health of mind by letting a healthy body acompany it, while at the same time rejecting the notion of letting a healthy body be complemented by a healthy mind.

However full or empty the cup, any challenge should be directed at his post rather than his person. Criticizing his points based on facts, will bring forth many truths - if the truths are Michaels or the ones opposing him are of little relevance, he initiated a discussion leading to greater insight. Doing nothing but denouncing his article per se, will itself lack the ability to add value. Attacking his person will simply remove value from the discussion.

To further my view that we shouldn't rip out the tongue of anyone for not sharing our opinions i thought it interesting to add that the sport-heroes we follow do little for our own ideas and accomplishments, and little for making us in command of our own destiny.

Post 18

Thursday, August 4, 2005 - 9:03am

Oh, Marcus. If Marotta had said he was less than impressed by the mental demands of a sport that could be played asleep, would you cite a study showing that getting a lot of sleep makes one more alert? (I agree with George�s explanation for why a few drinks works for billiards.)

I liked the article. Michael�s first, right? I liked the old picture better.

Jon

Post 19

Thursday, August 4, 2005 - 9:38am