 |
| Alt-text: Also, all financial analysis. And, more directly, D&D. |
If the alt-text had also mentioned 'all science and statistical analysis', we would be able to see what a worthless piece of shit this comic is. Randall mocks the un-nerdy pursuit of sports and completely fails to see the parallels to the science he worships. The weights matter, Randall, they matter a lot. Worse is the sheer bald-faced hypocrisy – how many times have you done a pathetic Google-based 'analysis' of social trends, you fuckwit? How many times have you used the number of Google hits to make your point? HOW MANY FUCKING TIMES?
Okay, okay, maybe he is just pointing out that the winning and losing of competitive sports is just a way of producing 'random numbers', and he isn't mocking the statistical analysis that accompanies them. However, if he's willing to refer to all the skill, strategy, athleticism, psychology and quick-thinking involved in so many sports as a 'weighted random number generator', then what area of human endeavour can you not apply the same idea? Science – your experiment produces some weighted random numbers, and you build a narrative for why they occur. Engineering – you combine individual components based on weighted random numbers, and build a narrative for why they work together. History – people do things based on weighted random numbers, and you build narrative for why they do that. But of course Randall the Nerd-King picks on sports.
I would like to know whether Randall really is a nerd that dismisses sport as pointless because he is rubbish at it (while arguing about the minutiae of Star Wars), or if he is just cynically working his fanbase.
Probably both.
I like the excellent and brilliant artwork of this comic. I stand in awe at the amount of effort that went into it.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, Randall's observation applies equally well to THE WHOLE OF HUMAN LIFE: random shit happens, we interpret it.
ReplyDeleteWhat an idiot.
Of all the things he could have nitpicked about Professional Sports... this is the best he could come up with? Come ON Randal, you can do better than that.
ReplyDelete"I would like to know whether Randall really is a nerd that dismisses sport as pointless because he is rubbish at it (while arguing about the minutiae of Star Wars), or if he is just cynically working his fanbase."
While we're on the topic, I'm going to take the opportunity to jump on that box and express my distaste for professional sports. Pre-cursor, I live in Vancouver. The Vancouver Canucks (a hockey team) have just made it into the finals. Good for them. The problem I have is not with the sport itself, the vast amount of money it produces, or with fans being excited at their local teams prospects. The problem I have with it, is that for some reason, when the canucks win a game, that somehow makes it socially acceptable to drive around, honking at everything, running up and down the street screaming, and generally making a complete ass of yourself. We're not talking just outside the stadium, or even just outside a sports bar. We're talking residential streets at 11PM at night! On any other day, you'd be arrested for disturbing the peace, but on a game day, the cops have no choice but to look the other way, even if they were inclined otherwise. I mean, what the hell is wrong with these people? Furthermore, ANY time you have some kind of contact with someone in say, customer service, or a cashier, if any kind of conversation outside of what is directly happening occurs, it is ALWAYS "Did you see the game?" "Are you watching the game" "What's the latest score?" Why is it assumed I care about this? Why is THIS what is always used to "chat"? Why did I never get "So what did you think of that election!" (We had an election in early May). On that note, voter turnout was BELOW 60%. That is atrocious in and of itself. But if I was to compare the number of people I know who voted, with the number of people I know who watch Hockey or at following the Canucks... it just makes me sick.
\rant
Haha, are you shitting me? Don't even try telling me anybody was excited for the election.
ReplyDeleteP.S. Booohooohooo stop liking what I don't like
I don't understand sports very well, so maybe this comic is over my head, but where exactly is there random number generation in sports? It seems like sports statistics like batting averages, runs scored, passing yardage and so forth are the opposite of random, since they're representations of things that actually happened. They aren't generated randomly, they're generated... procedurally? Is that the word? Anyway, it seems like sports commentators are taking a narrative expressed through numbers and then using that to make predictions based on that data. Then again, I don't watch sports very often, and I might be misunderstanding what he means by 'random'.
ReplyDeleteNow, in the Alt-text, there is almost a funny joke in mentioning D&D, but see: it's the wrong joke. It only 'works' as a joke because of the bizarre and nonsensical phrasing he used to describe sports commentators which isn't accurate anyway.
As a D&D nerd who has Football nerd friends (some of which are also D&D nerds), I've often wondered about the parallel conversations football fans have about specific players' merits and flaws against each other compared to my conversations of this or that class option or feat chain. I think there's something really clever to be said about the similarity of the two hobbies, despite the assumption that they are at odds.
I haven't yet come up with that joke because I don't get paid to be creative or funny, luckily for me.
@16:29 Fuck yeah. The humanities had this shit covered decades ago. It's too bad that doesn't count or he might have known about it.
ReplyDeleteYou have to understand the current ESPN-laden culture, and the pushback by sabermetrics, to get this cartoon. He's saying that sport outcomes, especially in small samples like a playoff game or playoff series, are indistinguishable from a random process. Weighted by true skill, certainly, but subject to massive amounts of luck, random variance, etc.
ReplyDeleteSports fans and commentators, though, completely refuse to acknowledge the role of luck in said outcomes, instead attributing them to "heart", "guts", "intangibles", etc. -- that's the "narratives" part of the cartoon. They take results from extremely small samples and make wildly baseless assumptions about a player's character when it's likely pure randomness caused the outcome.
Only recently, with the advent of sabermetrics, have analysts begun to try and parse luck from skill in sports outcomes. Those familiar with the introduction of science to sports analysis will find this funny, because it's a battle that's constantly being fought. It's not so much a dig at sports, but a slam on the mindless analysis that goes on among those who refuse to recognize the role of luck in addition to skill.
Some much funnier critiques of people's obsessions with sports can be found here and here.
ReplyDeleteFor a picture of what Randy was probably going for in this strip (panel?) check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0sLuRsu1Do&feature=player_detailpage#t=829s (skip to 13:50). In fact, I would be extremely certain that he had watched that very video less than a day before conceiving Friday's effort
ReplyDeleteFor a picture of what Randall achieved in this strip, check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-z05l12WX4. In fact, I'm certain it will give a great understanding of xkcd in general.
ReplyDeleteOne of only two sports events I ever watch voluntarily is the Tour de France. The entire North American experience of the Tour is mediated through the commentary of Phil Ligget (and Some Other Guy). The "narrative" often includes tales of Tours past (often the bizarre occurrences of those po-dunk decades that preceded helicopters, helmet radios, and wireless cameras), trivia about the towns being passed through, and other cultural tidbits. I suspect that cycling isn't the only sport where the narrative comprises many aspects entirely external to the series of die rolls that constitutes a match/round/quarter. In other words, I think Randall is very ignorant of sports.
ReplyDeleteThis is much like when he decides to reference something from the humanities or social sciences (whether mockingly or in a "well gee whaddya know, according to wikipedia.." kind of manner), inadvertently advertising his complete ignorance of those fields.