Wrestleknownothing

I worked with a guy who claimed he could stay within a body length of Michael Phelps for one length of the pool (50 meters). I laughed out loud at him and said he could not stay within a body length of Phelps on the start alone. He kept insisting. So I bet him $500 he could not stay within a body length of me for 50 meters. He stopped insisting.

I remember seeing a TED talk about the specialization of athletes by body type. It was illuminating.

I had dinner tonight with a family I had never met. Husband, wife, three daughters. Swim trials were on TV. I asked the four women if they follow swimming during the Olympics. While they all said yes, it was not their favorite. Then I asked them if they watched wrestling during the Olympics. Mom said the matches were too long. Daughter 1 said they just lean on each other. Daughter 2 said their ears are gross. And Daughter 3 said the rules are too difficult to undersand. Not exactly scientific, but in line with things that have been said. Except for the ears. So, headgear?

They tied in the individual event for the last relay spot, so there was a swim off to break the tie. Pretty standard stuff.

In some cases, big money. Big, stupid money. https://glewee.com/blog/highest-paid-influencers-on-instagram/

There are a couple missing elements: Swimming is easier to watch. Wrestling last longer than all but the 1500 meters (and I may be the only person in the world who tunes in for that) and sometimes the 800 meters. And in many cases they do not even show the full 1500 or 800. Katie Ledecky's go to events are sometimes not even shown in their entirety, but people still tune in to see the start and finish. World and Olympic records matter. When someone breaks a world record in swimming they are clearly the best that has ever been. The best that has ever been in wrestling is subjective. This feeds into the need for story. Ditto for close finishes, blowouts, and come from behind wins. While they are all present in wrestling, they seem more exciting to the novice viewer of swimming than the novice viewer of wrestling. For example, in swimming it is easier to determine when a blowout happens. Viewers do not need to be reminded of the technical superiority rule in swimming, they know where the wall is. Swimming always has young phenoms coming up. Wrestling rarely does. Or at least rarely has young phenoms who are considered gold medal challengers. Gable certainly fit that definition, but then he abandoned the sport. For the most part in swimming the young phenoms are around for multiple cycles. Phelps competed in 5 Olympics. Ledecky is going to her 4th Olympics. They both competed at 15 years old (and in Ledecky's case, won gold). And now Canada has the next phenom who is in her second Olympics at 17 years old. Both sports are highly technical at the top end, but for viewers of wrestling you really need to understand the technical nature in order to fully enjoy viewing. Hand fighting does not make for great TV. Setting up a shot with movement and pressure does not make for good TV. That is not the case with swimming. No one follows what happens under the water even though it is the most critical element. Hell, even the announcers almost never even talk about what happens under the water. But as a swimmer from long ago, I am fascinated by how different the stroke is from when I was swimming.

Let's start by acknowledging that swimming is awesome. With that out of the way, Amen to your explanation. I would add that the Olympics broadcasters love stories. And in the US they especially love stories about US athletes. And US athletes dominate swimming unlike any other sport. That combined with all of what you detail above leads to better stories. Everyone knows about Mark Spitz winning seven golds in one Olympics. Everyone knows about Michael Phelps breaking Spitz's record by winning eight in one Olympics (and 28 total, 23 golds). Everyone knows who Katie Ledecky is as she sneaks up on the most gold medals by a female swimmer, and possibly by any female athlete. Those volume based records make for great stories, and stories sell the Olympics. That, and swimming is awesome.

I 100% was saying I am tired of hearing how hard it is to be a white man. And I was saying that anyone who swallows this guys story is relying on an unreliable narrator. Those two statements are consistent with each other.

It is an acknowledgement that racism exists. I am not at all dismissive of hard work. I am dismissive of this guy who is too dumb to know he is being played. He clearly does not know the person taping him well enough to know what her agenda is, but he is going to talk freely to her over drinks. Sounds exactly like every guy who has ever gotten passed over for a promotion. It is never due to their shortcomings, like being too dumb to know that you are being pumped for information while being secretly recorded on a device sitting on the table immediately in front of you. It is always someone else's fault. Like the guys who blame the ref.

I looked up DEI and it looks like one of those things that starts with good intentions, acquires an acronym, develops measures that are only barely, and sometimes tangentially, related to the goal, that then cause people to first manage to the measure (instead of the goal), and ultimately figure out how to game the measure, the goal be damned. ESG is a perfect example of this. Carbon is bad, and more trees are good for the environment. Then someone says wouldn't it be great if we stopped a logging company from chopping down trees? But how do we do that? I know, with an incentive program. If you do not cut down those trees we will give you a carbon credit that you can then sell to someone who really, really wants to pollute. That way you still get paid even though you did not cut down those trees. We can see where this is going. Now I have an incentive to threaten to cut down trees that I never intended to cut down, just so I can get that carbon credit. And if that works I will threaten to cut down trees I do not even own. And if that works I will threaten to cut down trees that do not even exist.

What I am talking about is that it is not hard to be a white man in America. And because a senior vice president, who was too stupid to know he was being played, wants to blame getting passed over for a promotion on some other agenda, then perhaps it is true, but we should not discount his "too stupid to know he was being played" nature as the reason he was passed over.

You obviously have a point you want to make. So go ahead and make it instead of pussy footing around with your Socratic method.

I don't know what you are getting at, but I do know that if I ask you, you will not answer. This is what makes you so boring.

You bore me

All Asian men? The Asian men not already listed? What are you looking for that you couldn't find with an internet search?

How do you figure? In the 2-year period 2020–2021: For the 20–29 age group, the real median annual earnings of: White, non-Hispanic men were 34% higher than Black, non-Hispanic men and 16% higher than Hispanic men. Asian men were 34% higher than Black, non-Hispanic men and 15% higher than Hispanic men. For the 50–59 age group, the real median annual earnings of: White, non-Hispanic men were 49% higher than Black, non-Hispanic men and 53% higher than Hispanic men. Asian men were 67% higher than Black, non-Hispanic men 71% higher than Hispanic men. SOURCE: Social Security Administration (SSA) calculations using SSA earnings data linked to Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement public-use files.

Me and my fellow white men are so tired of how hard it is to be a white male in this country. That senior vice president making hundreds of thousands of dollars per year isn't gonna take it anymore.

Forgot to post my meat porn from Father's Day. Son in law smoked ribs and then finished them on my grill. Daughter brought hot links from Paulina Market (sausage kings of Chicago). Salad is grilled corn and grilled peppers. And finished the day with a local-ish bourbon, J Henry Small Batch.

Yeah, I read that one of two ways, depending on the situation. Sometimes, some people just do not get it and they think the schools do pay. And sometimes people use the terms loosely given that there is differing levels of coordination that goes on between the coaches and the boosters/collectives, so people use the terms interchangeably.

Colleges do not pay NIL, third parties do. If Sorrentino wanted to pay Ferrari to wrestle somewhere, as of now he could. While there is an NCAA rule against pay to play arrangements, there is also a temporary injunction in place blocking the rule from being enforced.

Especially if he tries checking Staroci's oil using the dipstick

Not AJ Ferrari

Are we sure he has three years left? Are we willing to take his word for it? It is not like he has been working with a school compliance officer for the past several years. And it hinges on whether last year was considered an Olympic RS by the NCAA or just by AJ. I am very curious if that is the case. The way the rule is written implies that it is not the case. The rule requires a vote of the "Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement, or a committee designated by it". Was AJ's case voted on? Can it be voted on retrospectively? Or is this like Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy?

Whenever this happens to me (somewhat often), I DM Bob and he clears out my old attachments.