From the desk of G.I. Joelgernaut (aka Joel Sherman):

 And if there is, do we really want to showcase inferior
 play for spectators?

BDEINOU.

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998
From: Jim Geary
To: cgp
Subject: Re: NSC final

Hmm, multiple people have emailed me implying that the world champ deserved a little comeuppance for his elitist viewpoints, and that my BEDOUIN reference was just that. It was not meant as such; it was just a fun little shot at my friend. Just the same, the number of blunders I made v Jere Mead with the cameraeye on and $4-9k at risk are innumerable. Kids don't try this at home, you have to be pretty good to pull a tiger's tail.

I've entirely reread Joel's letter and it occurs to me that his missive was borne of care for the success of the game, not personal gain nor an opportunity to smite his enemies.

The paragraph that may have rubbed folks the wrong way:

     "As to the suggestion, I forget who made it, that the lower
     divisions should also have best-of-x final matches, I'm not
     at all sure what purpose would be served by that.  Is there
     supposed to be an audience that would watch our weaker players
     fight it out for the smaller prizes?  And if there is, do we 
     really want to showcase inferior play for spectators?  I think
     the lower division winners will get all the recognition they
     deserve at the awards ceremony when they pick up their checks 
     and have their photos printed in various publications (with 
     the usual misspelled names in the captions ;-)).  Showing
     *how* they won the money may be inspirational to a few, but 
     will not be very instructive."

No. I can only think of two endeavors that even attempt to, and those are college basketball and golf. The NIT is a non-starter interestwise compared to the big dance. And at this point in time, I don't think that Scrabble has graced television ubiquitously enough that it is ready for spinoff coverage. Raise your hand if you've heard of the NIKE tour. Jump up and down if you've actually watched live coverage. Women's sports may be another story, but are irrelevant to Scrabble play.

- Do we really want to showcase inferior play?

No. As a practical matter joe-blow on the street might not really know the difference between a 1600's play and a 2000's play (I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a 1300 and an 1100 [1]). But just the same, given the finite media exposure, we should shepherd resources to highlight the superstar players. This is the media interest that justifies the six-figure expenditures for these events.

Joel's other comments seemed entirely sensitive to the situation of lower division winners.

And now more from JG on the star system[2]:

Many of my coworkers followed my progress and disappointment at the Chicago NSC via the web coverage. (Thanks, jjc, ssj etal). However, many of them commented to me the next week that they didn't care about Joeschmoe from Idaho; they[3] wanted to know what was going on at the top[ 4]. I have no doubt that the non-playing public mirrors this sentiment. Why? Because the American sports fan culture is based on watching the best. This is their model. While the player who won 3rd in x-lower division may be a great person with a wonderful story, the rest of the world doesn't care because their model of sports spectation orbits around the star culture. Insensitive? No. Just telling it like it is. When in my 3rd tournament I won the 2nd division at the 1992 NSC, I sheepishly explained to friends that the accomplishment was tempered by the fact that there were over 100 people in the division above who were probably better than me. I would usually then recount the tales of SPRITZY and QUANTILES[5]. Even when what would at the time seem to be a personal high, I was sentient of highlighting the star system. Maybe lower players aren't fans of the game to the extent I am, so may not take the same interest as I did, but maybe that's why I'm winning expert divisions now[ 6].

And now a little on sensitivity[7]:

Maybe my letters to cgp are insensitive. Maybe Joel's are insensitive. Just the same, it really shouldn't matter. The ideas debated on this forum should be weighed on merit not presentation. It _is_ possible to screw up a good presentation of ideas, but why should that distract us from analyzing the issues at hand? All manner of vitriol was heaped upon me last year for questioning the legal merit of invoking the Americans with Disabilities Act on Scrabble organizers. Why? Because I presented a viewpoint that questioned something that made some people uncomfortable. Many, many smart people for some reason jumped on me while failing to logically analyze the ideas presented. I didn't take it personally[ 8]. Those who know me know that I'd carry Felt up two flights of stairs if that was the only way he could get to a playing area. However that has nothing to do with the truth of the original conjecture.

Those who foretold a kinder, gentler JG given the birth of my daughter will be sadly disappointed to hear that my love for truth n logic and love for my family map out like the real/complex number plane[ 9].

Yours in a continued slap in the face of public taste,

JG

[1] Push your reply button now to call JG an elitist.

[2] Good god! I'm turning into Steven Alexander with all these darn footnotes.

[3] Not made up to bolster my argument. Testimonials available upon request.

[4] No offense to Sherrie. I understand she was inundated with responsibilities and as a result wasn't in much of a position to screen the editorial content of the information with which she was deluged. JG suggests to the folks who write the checks that someone be dispatched with reporting solely on the "elite" happenings. Tho, of course, it ain't my money.

[5] Key plays from the Edley - Wapnick battle that decided the 1992 North American Championship.

[6] Once again, another opportunity to hit your reply button letting me know what an elitist pig I am. Really, I don't mind.

[7] Don't let my wife see this, she'll choke guffawing.

[8] I used to have a computer science teacher who when asked anything, would always reply, "What would you do if you were a compiler?" When everyone is screaming for my head, I just think, "What would Feynman[ 10] think here?"

[9] Truly an abominable piece of writing, but I'd venture to say the first time that analogy as ever appeared in print.

[10] Nobel winning physicist and much loved teacher and writer. _Everyone_ should read "Surely Your Joking.."

Last Modified 9/24/00

Back to Scrabble Correspondence Page
Back to Scrabble Main Page
Back to Jim's Main Page