Anonymous
10/25/2024 08:31
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rowing, your boat placement is generally based on your erg times.
Which actually doesn’t translate to boat speed! I row a single now and easily beat men who can kill me on the erg, because in a boat power is meaningless unless applied correctly and in unison with your crew.
Seat racing can find that out - two boats race, pull together and two rowers swap, race again, swap again. You can do it in a way that the rowers are never sure who is being tested so they all pull as if it’s their own butt on the line each time. I don’t know that most high school crews take the time (and anguish) to do it, though.
Former coxswain and crew coach here - you said you row a single but can beat people because boat power is meaningless unless applied in unison...but starting the argument with you in a single doesn't quite work, you know?
I mean, I get what you are saying, because the catch and drive of the oar matter so much, as does timing in the bigger boats.
Really, Coach? I think you know exactly what I am implying but, like a good cox, you like to have the last word.
Technique matters. If you can’t channel your power, if you check your run, if your blades go in at different times, all the muscle in the world won’t help you. I am not strong anymore, but I am still a fine rower, so I beat the scullers who ignore skill and try to just muscle their way down the river. That is true in a single or an eight or anywhere in between.
you got me there.
Anonymous
10/25/2024 07:48
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rowing, your boat placement is generally based on your erg times.
Which actually doesn’t translate to boat speed! I row a single now and easily beat men who can kill me on the erg, because in a boat power is meaningless unless applied correctly and in unison with your crew.
Seat racing can find that out - two boats race, pull together and two rowers swap, race again, swap again. You can do it in a way that the rowers are never sure who is being tested so they all pull as if it’s their own butt on the line each time. I don’t know that most high school crews take the time (and anguish) to do it, though.
Former coxswain and crew coach here - you said you row a single but can beat people because boat power is meaningless unless applied in unison...but starting the argument with you in a single doesn't quite work, you know?
I mean, I get what you are saying, because the catch and drive of the oar matter so much, as does timing in the bigger boats.
Really, Coach? I think you know exactly what I am implying but, like a good cox, you like to have the last word.
Technique matters. If you can’t channel your power, if you check your run, if your blades go in at different times, all the muscle in the world won’t help you. I am not strong anymore, but I am still a fine rower, so I beat the scullers who ignore skill and try to just muscle their way down the river. That is true in a single or an eight or anywhere in between.
Anonymous
10/24/2024 11:34
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rowing, your boat placement is generally based on your erg times.
Which actually doesn’t translate to boat speed! I row a single now and easily beat men who can kill me on the erg, because in a boat power is meaningless unless applied correctly and in unison with your crew.
Seat racing can find that out - two boats race, pull together and two rowers swap, race again, swap again. You can do it in a way that the rowers are never sure who is being tested so they all pull as if it’s their own butt on the line each time. I don’t know that most high school crews take the time (and anguish) to do it, though.
I’ve never seen a HS rowing team seat races properly, and even at the collegiate and national team level seat races are influenced by the coaches’ whims and favoritism that conveniently never put everyone in the right combinations or have an unfavored person held back until the water is choppy or the wind picks up.
I can think of people on the U.S. team in recent cycles who were boated based on erg scores and perceived vibes on the water. And I can think of other b and c boats where all of the seat racing on the world couldn’t put together a fast boat because the coaches couldn’t translate fast erg scores at camps to a boat that worked well together.
So my vote is rowing=unfair sport pretending to be fair sport.
Anonymous
10/24/2024 10:09
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rowing, your boat placement is generally based on your erg times.
Which actually doesn’t translate to boat speed! I row a single now and easily beat men who can kill me on the erg, because in a boat power is meaningless unless applied correctly and in unison with your crew.
Seat racing can find that out - two boats race, pull together and two rowers swap, race again, swap again. You can do it in a way that the rowers are never sure who is being tested so they all pull as if it’s their own butt on the line each time. I don’t know that most high school crews take the time (and anguish) to do it, though.
My high school's football team had something akin to that. It was a skills-based tryout, so you would go one on one against a defender, whoever was better at going against the defender would get the spot. Players that lost out had an opportunity to go one on one against the winner. If they won head on, they would start both on defense and offense. Other players could also go one on one. Some were qualified starters for multiple positions, especially on the line. My buddy was nose guard. The McD's Owner Daddy Boy, big in the booster club, wanted to try out for half back. He tried to stiff arm my buddy, who tackled him and broke his arm during the position-based tryouts. They wanted to win also.
Anonymous
10/24/2024 08:23
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rowing, your boat placement is generally based on your erg times.
Which actually doesn’t translate to boat speed! I row a single now and easily beat men who can kill me on the erg, because in a boat power is meaningless unless applied correctly and in unison with your crew.
Seat racing can find that out - two boats race, pull together and two rowers swap, race again, swap again. You can do it in a way that the rowers are never sure who is being tested so they all pull as if it’s their own butt on the line each time. I don’t know that most high school crews take the time (and anguish) to do it, though.
Former coxswain and crew coach here - you said you row a single but can beat people because boat power is meaningless unless applied in unison...but starting the argument with you in a single doesn't quite work, you know?
I mean, I get what you are saying, because the catch and drive of the oar matter so much, as does timing in the bigger boats.
Anonymous
10/23/2024 20:13
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Rowing, your boat placement is generally based on your erg times.
Which actually doesn’t translate to boat speed! I row a single now and easily beat men who can kill me on the erg, because in a boat power is meaningless unless applied correctly and in unison with your crew.
Seat racing can find that out - two boats race, pull together and two rowers swap, race again, swap again. You can do it in a way that the rowers are never sure who is being tested so they all pull as if it’s their own butt on the line each time. I don’t know that most high school crews take the time (and anguish) to do it, though.
Anonymous
10/22/2024 21:00
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You clowns buy into team sports and end up getting cut and fat and out of shape later in life
I want to move my kids from basketball and football to golf + tennis. And dad played in college. I just have a gut feeling it's not worth it and they could be just as happy with an individual life sport.
Sorry meant to add dad played football in college. He doesn't do any sports now. What a waste. Seems like individual sports just have lifelong benefits. Our golf and tennis team are hard to make but at the min. at least you can play post HS and college.
Golf a kid will play for life...because you can play a competitive game with other competitive golfers or you can easily play for fun with scratch golfers. Also, it's not like a competitive game of golf involves sprinting on the golf course...you can still walk leisurely (or now rent a cart) on the course. Honestly, it's hard to really be able to say that you are working out as a 50 year old because you continue to play golf.
Plenty of former tennis players don't play that often...plenty of former swimmers don't really swim in anything resembling training anymore..etc.
Lots of former basketball players still play basketball as adults. Not sure why you would think that isn't fairly popular for adults.
They don't swim or play tennis everyday but they do swim or play tennis regularly.
Golf and tennis are the two sports that you can play for life. As you get older, you can switch over to pickleball if tennis is too much for you. Golf and tennis are two of the sports that are objective and not subjective. The coach can not cut you from the team and put another inferior in the team because the scores do not lie. That being said, they are two of the hardest sports to make in high school, especially if you live in wealthy areas, and due to a small roster size.
Golf and tennis are two of the hardest HS sports to make? LOL! No.
You must go to a poor school
+1 That poster must had gone to a poor school.
Go to McLean, Langley or Oakton HS with almost 3000 students and looks at the roster of the tennis/golf teams. There are 10 players on the varsity golf team, I think. The chance of making the golf team is 10/3000, and just about everyone in those areas have $$$ to private training and coaching.
Isn't that the definition of not fair. Just to be clear. What does "private" mean private means not publicly available. So, by definition private training and coaching is not "fair", because not everyone has an opportunity. In this instance the unfairness is not due to some innate talent, but due economic and political station of those who can afford private coaching and training as well as just greens fees. EG it doesn't have anything to do with the sport as to why some kids get to make the team and others don't. It would be another if it was an innate talent or skill that could be acquired through common low-cost activities. EG go running get faster lift some weights get stronger. Shoot a basketball get better at shooting a basket.
Some team sports seem inexpensive eg soccer. Anyone can wear out a soccer ball, but there is a substantial component that has to be learned by interacting within a team. EG the MSI travel coaches' kids (paid coaches and private club owner not just parent coaches) were on my kid's team they felt very strongly that my kid should play defender, but she was the only one of the younger kids playing up a year to score a goal. One of the kids with, parent coach, started at striker nearly every game despite being older and didn't score a goal the entire season and was repeatedly tackled whenever they got the ball to her. Soccer they don't really care if they win. Soccer isn't so competitive here. It is generally run by private clubs and there is someone who will take your money, but I'm not paying for that.
That might be your definition of "unfair" but to others, someone who did nothing to achieve their height or stature (which is almost always an advantage) other than to have had tall parents, might be the definition of "unfair". In both cases the kid has no control over these factors (genetics and finances). In which case "fairness" is an illusion regarding sports. There is always going to be inherent unfairness because every kid has different genetics and HHI.
I think people underestimate the effort that tall people have to put in to get the results. I go spinning. The instructor said big hill 120 watts, for me 120 watts is easy, to me a big hill is more like 240+ watts. I looked it up online there are professional cyclists that push that many watts. The point is to ride up that hill or run down the court it takes twice as much effort.
Go pump some iron, spin 240+ watts now let's play basketball. There are plenty of short dynamos out there. Short people just are not used to consistently having to put in that much effort, whereas tall people have to be much more coordinated and stronger just to learn to walk for example. That is my opinion, they learn from an early age how to put in effort. Catch a ball, jump, shoot, none of these things are easier because kids are tall.
... longer limbs and therefore a longer fulcrum for all rotational strength, which makes many sports movements stronger.
I see what you are saying, maybe you are challenged.
Anonymous
10/22/2024 10:47
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You clowns buy into team sports and end up getting cut and fat and out of shape later in life
I want to move my kids from basketball and football to golf + tennis. And dad played in college. I just have a gut feeling it's not worth it and they could be just as happy with an individual life sport.
Sorry meant to add dad played football in college. He doesn't do any sports now. What a waste. Seems like individual sports just have lifelong benefits. Our golf and tennis team are hard to make but at the min. at least you can play post HS and college.
Golf a kid will play for life...because you can play a competitive game with other competitive golfers or you can easily play for fun with scratch golfers. Also, it's not like a competitive game of golf involves sprinting on the golf course...you can still walk leisurely (or now rent a cart) on the course. Honestly, it's hard to really be able to say that you are working out as a 50 year old because you continue to play golf.
Plenty of former tennis players don't play that often...plenty of former swimmers don't really swim in anything resembling training anymore..etc.
Lots of former basketball players still play basketball as adults. Not sure why you would think that isn't fairly popular for adults.
They don't swim or play tennis everyday but they do swim or play tennis regularly.
Golf and tennis are the two sports that you can play for life. As you get older, you can switch over to pickleball if tennis is too much for you. Golf and tennis are two of the sports that are objective and not subjective. The coach can not cut you from the team and put another inferior in the team because the scores do not lie. That being said, they are two of the hardest sports to make in high school, especially if you live in wealthy areas, and due to a small roster size.
Golf and tennis are two of the hardest HS sports to make? LOL! No.
You must go to a poor school
+1 That poster must had gone to a poor school.
Go to McLean, Langley or Oakton HS with almost 3000 students and looks at the roster of the tennis/golf teams. There are 10 players on the varsity golf team, I think. The chance of making the golf team is 10/3000, and just about everyone in those areas have $$$ to private training and coaching.
Isn't that the definition of not fair. Just to be clear. What does "private" mean private means not publicly available. So, by definition private training and coaching is not "fair", because not everyone has an opportunity. In this instance the unfairness is not due to some innate talent, but due economic and political station of those who can afford private coaching and training as well as just greens fees. EG it doesn't have anything to do with the sport as to why some kids get to make the team and others don't. It would be another if it was an innate talent or skill that could be acquired through common low-cost activities. EG go running get faster lift some weights get stronger. Shoot a basketball get better at shooting a basket.
Some team sports seem inexpensive eg soccer. Anyone can wear out a soccer ball, but there is a substantial component that has to be learned by interacting within a team. EG the MSI travel coaches' kids (paid coaches and private club owner not just parent coaches) were on my kid's team they felt very strongly that my kid should play defender, but she was the only one of the younger kids playing up a year to score a goal. One of the kids with, parent coach, started at striker nearly every game despite being older and didn't score a goal the entire season and was repeatedly tackled whenever they got the ball to her. Soccer they don't really care if they win. Soccer isn't so competitive here. It is generally run by private clubs and there is someone who will take your money, but I'm not paying for that.
That might be your definition of "unfair" but to others, someone who did nothing to achieve their height or stature (which is almost always an advantage) other than to have had tall parents, might be the definition of "unfair". In both cases the kid has no control over these factors (genetics and finances). In which case "fairness" is an illusion regarding sports. There is always going to be inherent unfairness because every kid has different genetics and HHI.
You have the right to an attorney, and if you can't afford an attorney, one will be appointed to represent you. There is a difference between "public defender" and "legal counsel" that the best money can buy, you understand that right?
It is like complaining about "unfair" for not being able to attend McLean high school when you live in Annandale, because you can't afford to buy a home in McLean, LOL....
School zones may have boundaries, not everything in life does. I would be more than happy to keep the kids from Potomac(that don't pay city taxes) with their private lessons, out of our city swim teams.
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Those Potomac kids' parents have to pay property taxes to support public schools even though they don't even attend public schools. You gladly take their taxes money, and want to keep them out at the same time. What a hypocrite....
They don't pay taxes to fund our city pool.
Anonymous
10/22/2024 10:43
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You clowns buy into team sports and end up getting cut and fat and out of shape later in life
I want to move my kids from basketball and football to golf + tennis. And dad played in college. I just have a gut feeling it's not worth it and they could be just as happy with an individual life sport.
Sorry meant to add dad played football in college. He doesn't do any sports now. What a waste. Seems like individual sports just have lifelong benefits. Our golf and tennis team are hard to make but at the min. at least you can play post HS and college.
Golf a kid will play for life...because you can play a competitive game with other competitive golfers or you can easily play for fun with scratch golfers. Also, it's not like a competitive game of golf involves sprinting on the golf course...you can still walk leisurely (or now rent a cart) on the course. Honestly, it's hard to really be able to say that you are working out as a 50 year old because you continue to play golf.
Plenty of former tennis players don't play that often...plenty of former swimmers don't really swim in anything resembling training anymore..etc.
Lots of former basketball players still play basketball as adults. Not sure why you would think that isn't fairly popular for adults.
They don't swim or play tennis everyday but they do swim or play tennis regularly.
Golf and tennis are the two sports that you can play for life. As you get older, you can switch over to pickleball if tennis is too much for you. Golf and tennis are two of the sports that are objective and not subjective. The coach can not cut you from the team and put another inferior in the team because the scores do not lie. That being said, they are two of the hardest sports to make in high school, especially if you live in wealthy areas, and due to a small roster size.
Golf and tennis are two of the hardest HS sports to make? LOL! No.
You must go to a poor school
+1 That poster must had gone to a poor school.
Go to McLean, Langley or Oakton HS with almost 3000 students and looks at the roster of the tennis/golf teams. There are 10 players on the varsity golf team, I think. The chance of making the golf team is 10/3000, and just about everyone in those areas have $$$ to private training and coaching.
Isn't that the definition of not fair. Just to be clear. What does "private" mean private means not publicly available. So, by definition private training and coaching is not "fair", because not everyone has an opportunity. In this instance the unfairness is not due to some innate talent, but due economic and political station of those who can afford private coaching and training as well as just greens fees. EG it doesn't have anything to do with the sport as to why some kids get to make the team and others don't. It would be another if it was an innate talent or skill that could be acquired through common low-cost activities. EG go running get faster lift some weights get stronger. Shoot a basketball get better at shooting a basket.
Some team sports seem inexpensive eg soccer. Anyone can wear out a soccer ball, but there is a substantial component that has to be learned by interacting within a team. EG the MSI travel coaches' kids (paid coaches and private club owner not just parent coaches) were on my kid's team they felt very strongly that my kid should play defender, but she was the only one of the younger kids playing up a year to score a goal. One of the kids with, parent coach, started at striker nearly every game despite being older and didn't score a goal the entire season and was repeatedly tackled whenever they got the ball to her. Soccer they don't really care if they win. Soccer isn't so competitive here. It is generally run by private clubs and there is someone who will take your money, but I'm not paying for that.
That might be your definition of "unfair" but to others, someone who did nothing to achieve their height or stature (which is almost always an advantage) other than to have had tall parents, might be the definition of "unfair". In both cases the kid has no control over these factors (genetics and finances). In which case "fairness" is an illusion regarding sports. There is always going to be inherent unfairness because every kid has different genetics and HHI.
You have the right to an attorney, and if you can't afford an attorney, one will be appointed to represent you. There is a difference between "public defender" and "legal counsel" that the best money can buy, you understand that right?
It is like complaining about "unfair" for not being able to attend McLean high school when you live in Annandale, because you can't afford to buy a home in McLean, LOL....
School zones may have boundaries, not everything in life does. I would be more than happy to keep the kids from Potomac(that don't pay city taxes) with their private lessons, out of our city swim teams.
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Those Potomac kids' parents have to pay property taxes to support public schools even though they don't even attend public schools. You gladly take their taxes money, and want to keep them out at the same time. What a hypocrite....
Anonymous
10/22/2024 10:34
Subject: Which team sport is the most “fair”?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You clowns buy into team sports and end up getting cut and fat and out of shape later in life
I want to move my kids from basketball and football to golf + tennis. And dad played in college. I just have a gut feeling it's not worth it and they could be just as happy with an individual life sport.
Sorry meant to add dad played football in college. He doesn't do any sports now. What a waste. Seems like individual sports just have lifelong benefits. Our golf and tennis team are hard to make but at the min. at least you can play post HS and college.
Golf a kid will play for life...because you can play a competitive game with other competitive golfers or you can easily play for fun with scratch golfers. Also, it's not like a competitive game of golf involves sprinting on the golf course...you can still walk leisurely (or now rent a cart) on the course. Honestly, it's hard to really be able to say that you are working out as a 50 year old because you continue to play golf.
Plenty of former tennis players don't play that often...plenty of former swimmers don't really swim in anything resembling training anymore..etc.
Lots of former basketball players still play basketball as adults. Not sure why you would think that isn't fairly popular for adults.
They don't swim or play tennis everyday but they do swim or play tennis regularly.
Golf and tennis are the two sports that you can play for life. As you get older, you can switch over to pickleball if tennis is too much for you. Golf and tennis are two of the sports that are objective and not subjective. The coach can not cut you from the team and put another inferior in the team because the scores do not lie. That being said, they are two of the hardest sports to make in high school, especially if you live in wealthy areas, and due to a small roster size.
Golf and tennis are two of the hardest HS sports to make? LOL! No.
You must go to a poor school
+1 That poster must had gone to a poor school.
Go to McLean, Langley or Oakton HS with almost 3000 students and looks at the roster of the tennis/golf teams. There are 10 players on the varsity golf team, I think. The chance of making the golf team is 10/3000, and just about everyone in those areas have $$$ to private training and coaching.
Isn't that the definition of not fair. Just to be clear. What does "private" mean private means not publicly available. So, by definition private training and coaching is not "fair", because not everyone has an opportunity. In this instance the unfairness is not due to some innate talent, but due economic and political station of those who can afford private coaching and training as well as just greens fees. EG it doesn't have anything to do with the sport as to why some kids get to make the team and others don't. It would be another if it was an innate talent or skill that could be acquired through common low-cost activities. EG go running get faster lift some weights get stronger. Shoot a basketball get better at shooting a basket.
Some team sports seem inexpensive eg soccer. Anyone can wear out a soccer ball, but there is a substantial component that has to be learned by interacting within a team. EG the MSI travel coaches' kids (paid coaches and private club owner not just parent coaches) were on my kid's team they felt very strongly that my kid should play defender, but she was the only one of the younger kids playing up a year to score a goal. One of the kids with, parent coach, started at striker nearly every game despite being older and didn't score a goal the entire season and was repeatedly tackled whenever they got the ball to her. Soccer they don't really care if they win. Soccer isn't so competitive here. It is generally run by private clubs and there is someone who will take your money, but I'm not paying for that.
That might be your definition of "unfair" but to others, someone who did nothing to achieve their height or stature (which is almost always an advantage) other than to have had tall parents, might be the definition of "unfair". In both cases the kid has no control over these factors (genetics and finances). In which case "fairness" is an illusion regarding sports. There is always going to be inherent unfairness because every kid has different genetics and HHI.
I think people underestimate the effort that tall people have to put in to get the results. I go spinning. The instructor said big hill 120 watts, for me 120 watts is easy, to me a big hill is more like 240+ watts. I looked it up online there are professional cyclists that push that many watts. The point is to ride up that hill or run down the court it takes twice as much effort.
Go pump some iron, spin 240+ watts now let's play basketball. There are plenty of short dynamos out there. Short people just are not used to consistently having to put in that much effort, whereas tall people have to be much more coordinated and stronger just to learn to walk for example. That is my opinion, they learn from an early age how to put in effort. Catch a ball, jump, shoot, none of these things are easier because kids are tall.
One of my kids is tall for her age. One is short. I really don't think it was harder for the taller one to learn basic motor skills than the shorter one. They both put in a lot of work, but honestly the taller one has the benefit of having longer limbs and therefore a longer fulcrum for all rotational strength, which makes many sports movements stronger. Plus coaches look at her and think "tall = good." It's the shorter kid who has to work much harder to prove herself.