Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Who knows? Presumably autistic people aren't all identical. They can have a diverse range of goals and values, same as non-autistic people.
I don't know much of anything about traditional sports, but I doubt that this is literally true. If you're literally the best in the country then I'm sure a pro team will at least sign you.
I do watch a lot of eSports though so I can make a comparison with that. Top players will regularly stream matches, practice sessions, and analysis sessions on twitch. Stream views are certainly correlated with the skill of the player, but it's not a perfect 1-to-1 relationship. Some top players get far more views (and consequently, twitch sub money) than others because they have more interesting personalities, they put more time and effort into growing their streaming presence, or other chance factors. This is unavoidable. Especially in the smaller games there are no "managers", it's about as close to a pure free market as you can get, and when given the choice, the revealed preference of viewers is that they care about other factors besides just raw game skill.
The streamers who make a career as full time commentators or "personalities" get even more viewers than the top players themselves, which is to be expected, because they can focus 100% of their time and energy on growing their twitch/youtube presence, instead of splitting their focus between streaming and actually learning/practicing/competing in the game in question. So things like reputation and brand recognition can't be pinned solely on "managers", the person themselves also has to take an active role and put work into growing their reputation.
It's a game. Why does it have to be efficient?
It being efficient (maximally competitive) is literally a significant portion of what makes competitive makes fun to play and watch.
My entire post was about how people become fans of players and choose who/what to watch for reasons other than pure competitiveness.
Good example is chess, the games that top bots play with themselves are frankly more novel and interesting on a move-by-move basis than the games played between human pros, but as far as I know no one really watches bot games recreationally. The most popular streams are for the human pro tournaments where people can see the storylines and drama.
Yeah but how would you feel knowing Magnus Carlsen was just chosen for his blue eyes and there's players better than him out there with less gifted looks? I know that can't happen in chess, but you get the point.
The process being mostly meritocratic is a necessary but not sufficient condition to sell the surrounding story.
I agree with this. All of the factors have some weight, it’s not just one or the other.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Presumably because there is a lot of money in making it so
More options
Context Copy link
I think you can read it as ‘a bunch of accountants run out anyone with sports specific knowledge’.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link