Page 1 of 1

You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-19 03:40pm
by U.P. Cinnabar

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-19 06:11pm
by Broomstick
What, exactly, is the dope used for improving performance in curling? Eating more haggis?

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-19 07:40pm
by Lord Revan
Honestly maybe something to calm nerves or help consentrate as IIRC curling isn't just randomly swinging a broom about and there's skill involved in it.

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-19 10:37pm
by U.P. Cinnabar
Broomstick wrote: 2018-02-19 06:11pm What, exactly, is the dope used for improving performance in curling? Eating more haggis?
Eating any amount of haggis is likely to not improve one's performance in curling, or life in general.

I noticed Atholl's household didn't serve that to the royal party in the Victoria episode "The King Over the Water. "

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-19 10:42pm
by U.P. Cinnabar
The broom is used to clean up the curling rink(?!) to improve traction for the stones being slid across it.

Kinda like shuffleboard except played with heavy-ass stones on the ice.

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-21 03:17am
by Aleister Crowley
U.P. Cinnabar wrote: 2018-02-19 10:42pm The broom is used to clean up the curling rink(?!) to improve traction for the stones being slid across it.

Kinda like shuffleboard except played with heavy-ass stones on the ice.
Sometimes I feel like the word insanity really doesn't apply to individuals, but whole groups of people. Who in their right mind would make up a sport where you push heavy rocks across ice? Or whack a ball with a very long and flat bat? Or hit a ball into a small hole that just so happens to be arranged with a sandpit and a small pond nearby? Or a game where you run around four white squares to get to a pentagon? Or two men beating the hell out of each other in a roped off area.

Call me crazy, but a lot of sport just seems like the ravings of a madman.

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-21 04:52am
by Gandalf
Because watching humans in good competition is amazing. It shows the best and worst of humanity, provides fantastic drama, and can be just plain entertaining.

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-21 11:35am
by Simon_Jester
Aleister Crowley wrote: 2018-02-21 03:17am
U.P. Cinnabar wrote: 2018-02-19 10:42pm The broom is used to clean up the curling rink(?!) to improve traction for the stones being slid across it.

Kinda like shuffleboard except played with heavy-ass stones on the ice.
Sometimes I feel like the word insanity really doesn't apply to individuals, but whole groups of people. Who in their right mind would make up a sport where you push heavy rocks across ice? Or whack a ball with a very long and flat bat? Or hit a ball into a small hole that just so happens to be arranged with a sandpit and a small pond nearby? Or a game where you run around four white squares to get to a pentagon? Or two men beating the hell out of each other in a roped off area.

Call me crazy, but a lot of sport just seems like the ravings of a madman.
I mean, chess is a purely arbitrary game. The pieces and their movements bear no resemblance to anything in real life, to anything other than themselves. There are any number of other, similar-but-different rulesets that would be just as "good." There is no rational justification for why knights move the way they do, or pawns. They are, literally, arbitrary.

And this doesn't matter. Chess is a valid and useful and positive game that encourages logical thinking and intellect and so on, and it's interesting- legitimately so. The arbitrary rules do not exist for the sake of some objective 'good,' they exist to define a field of competition upon which contestants can strive against one another, and through which the emergent subtleties of human interaction can unfold.

The point of the seemingly purposeless action is not the action. The point is to define an arbitrary framework within which a competition can occur according to defined, agreed-upon rules.

This is equally true of curling, cricket, golf, baseball, and boxing as it is of chess. The only difference is that people's bodies are engaged as well as their minds.

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-22 05:06am
by tezunegari
So far only the results of the A-sample are known.
There is a chance of a false-positive and until the B-Sample has been tested this should not have been published IMO.

I am not familiar with the procedures, but the A-sample would be tested with fast and cheap tests that tend towards false-positives.
Then if a positive result is found a more exact testing method (slower, more expensive but also more reliable to create correct results) would be used on the B-Sample.

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-22 11:58am
by U.P. Cinnabar
Aleister Crowley wrote: 2018-02-21 03:17am
U.P. Cinnabar wrote: 2018-02-19 10:42pm The broom is used to clean up the curling rink(?!) to improve traction for the stones being slid across it.

Kinda like shuffleboard except played with heavy-ass stones on the ice.
Sometimes I feel like the word insanity really doesn't apply to individuals, but whole groups of people. Who in their right mind would make up a sport where you push heavy rocks across ice? Or whack a ball with a very long and flat bat? Or hit a ball into a small hole that just so happens to be arranged with a sandpit and a small pond nearby? Or a game where you run around four white squares to get to a pentagon? Or two men beating the hell out of each other in a roped off area.

Call me crazy, but a lot of sport just seems like the ravings of a madman.
I don't know. I watched last night's women's curling match between US and Sweden, and it was pretty intense.

Re: You Know You Fail As an Athlete, When...

Posted: 2018-02-22 12:00pm
by U.P. Cinnabar
tezunegari wrote: 2018-02-22 05:06am So far only the results of the A-sample are known.
There is a chance of a false-positive and until the B-Sample has been tested this should not have been published IMO.

I am not familiar with the procedures, but the A-sample would be tested with fast and cheap tests that tend towards false-positives.
Then if a positive result is found a more exact testing method (slower, more expensive but also more reliable to create correct results) would be used on the B-Sample.
That's because he was a Rooskie.

Were he an 'Murican, the US media would contend he was set up til the end of time. Or at least the next news cycle.