My first hate mail!

So, I run a winter league in Sunnyvale. I've been associated with this league in some way since 1998, either as a team manager, assistant director, executive director, or back to assistant.

About two - three years ago, I tried to pass off the league reins to Troy Wu, but was unsuccessful in doing so. I thought he was doing a fantastic job. Right up until the time when he completely disappeared. He didn't answer phone calls or emails. No one I knew knew what happened to him. The league almost folded because he had done the paperwork wrong, and disappeared.

He didn't play in the league last year, but has signed up this year. The descriptions for the signup haven't changed in the last ten years. They're the same as Bharat had them when he first did the online registration.

Well, Troy put his athletism as a one. The last person who did so was Kevin Shen about 5 years ago. Kevin did it as a joke, because said, "I won't move unless prodded, which is like a one." I thought this was funny, as Kevin is (was?) an amazing athlete and completely dominated the league.

I asked Troy why he put himself down as a one last Thursday, and expected him to reply with a humourous answer. Instead, I received the following email.

Now, part of me is, well, entertained, but part of me is very frightened, because I have not only misunderstood my relationship with Troy, but he seems to be very, very angry.

So, for your enjoyment, my first hate mail:

Kitt,

I've had some time to think about your question:

        "Why did [I] put [myself] down as a 1?"

And I think I owe it to myself to supply a more complete answer.  Let me
preface my response by saying, what a big fucking waste of my time to have
to do this twice.  I spent considerable time picking out my answers, which
I'm sure is quite a bit more effort spent than most people who so poorly
rate themselves (though can't blame them, the scale is at best
inconsistent, and more like completely retarded) that they render the
ratings entirely useless.  Otherwise, how would totally stacked teams get
formed alongside teams filled with
piss-poor-obviously-you-are-a-2-not-a-10 players.

        Furthermore, questioning my integrity offends me.  Seriously...If
        you want to talk parity...How do you do auto-draft with baggage?  
        You might want to confer with your fellow CS fans about a problem
        known as N-Sat.  If you've solved this problem, I'm guessing you
        two would have been inducted by the NSA and not allowed to put up
        websites where you use this incredible breakthrough.  Then again,
        maybe the NSA doesn't appreciate how hard a good winter-league
        draft can be.  Shame on them for not recruiting in the right
        places.  But I digress.

        On another note, don't you accommodate people's bad nights?  What
        does that do to parity, then?  But, I guess, yes, I'm the problem
        because I put myself down--honestly--as a '1'.  And, doesn't this
        increase the computational complexity of the problem?  Or have you
        just shown P=NP, and are about to render all the world's
        cryptography useless?  Can I be on your team when that happens?

On another tack, perhaps you might have at least wasted some of you own
time asking: "Now...what might have made an honest person answer '1' on
the list?  That doesn't seem right to me...Maybe it's the scale."  I
consider myself to be a person of the utmost integrity.  Perhaps your
time--and now my time--would be better spent asking other people how they
rate themselves the way they do.  Or asking people what they think of the
scale.

This reminds me of the 2 women who pulled me over for not putting my
registration sticker on my car.  I just hope, that some time, while some
idiot douchebag is pulling me over for something retarded, her daughter is
getting raped with broken glass bottles, burnt with cigarettes, and having
her nipples slowly torn off with pliers and then subsequently drowned
while she's pulling me over for a non-compliant sticker.  Analogously,
maybe check with a few others who are ruining the integrity of the rating
system rather than waste my time.

So, without further ado, let's go through the reasoning step by step.


                -- Level 10 --

        "I'm a world class natural athlete. I run faster than almost
        everybody I know and have cat like reflexes. I can catch anything
        thrown at me, have lightning reflexes and have no fear of throwing
        myself at the ground for any reason whatsoever. I can sky almost
        everybody I know. I inspire others to play harder just by playing
        hard myself."

Duh.

                -- Level 9 --

        "I'm a gifted natural athlete. I run faster than almost everybody
        I know and have good reflexes. I catch almost everything thrown at
        me and have fast reflexes. I'm willing to lay out if I think I
        have a remote chance of getting it. I can sky almost everybody."

I am hardly a gifted natural athlete.  I am certainly not faster than
almost everyone I know.  I don't have terribly good reflexes, and I will
occassionally drop.  I don't lay out all the time, and I don't sky almost
everybody.

The person who wrote this description has a penchant for repetition.  
Unless there is a finer distinction between "good reflexes" and "fast
reflexes" than I'm aware of.  Also, how do "cat-like" reflexes differ from
either "fast" or "good"?  How about "puma-like"?  Or maybe
"thundercats-like"?


                -- Level 8 --

        "I'm a gifted athlete. I can run competitively with anybody
        although I may not be the fastest. I catch almost anything thrown
        at me but don't have lightning reflexes. I lay out mostly on
        offense and very occasionally on defense. I can jump competitively
        with the best of them but I don't always get the disc."

Again with the repetition.  What is the difference between "gifted
athlete" and "gifted natural athelete"?  I don't run competitively with
just about anybody.  I don't catch almost anything thrown at me.  I layout
less on offense than I do on D, so that doesn't apply.  I don't jump
competitively with "the best of them", because in my mind, the best of
them include people like Alex Nord & Andrew Lugsdin.

At this point, the clear non-linearity--or even any attempt at linearity
in measuring scale--should be obvious.  I see almost no distinction
between 10 and 9, except for the use of the phrase "gifted natural
athelete" versus "world class natural athelete".  Also, I have no way to
measure myself against those standards.  There also seems to be a tiny
discernible difference between 9 and 8, except for the already mentioned
"gifted natural" versus "gifted".  Is the implication there that one has
bionic limbs or parts while the other is au natural?


                -- Level 7 --

        "I'm a good athlete. I can run competitively with most people but
        am usually not the fastest. I can catch most throws and have
        average reflexes. I lay out sometimes on offense and never on
        defense. I can jump competitively with most people but I
        occasionally get skyed."

Now we're in the land of mere mortals, I think.  I have no idea what
"running competitively with most people" means if it also means you are
not the fastest.  Does this mean you never get the catch or the D?  If you
are always behind (i.e., "not the faster", perhaps not "fastest"), are you
being competitive?  Or are you just a poser?  And, what is difference,
again, between:

        * World class natural athlete (Ben Johnson)

        * Gifted natural athlete (?)

        * Gifted athlete (?)

        * Good athlete (NCAA Div I athlete?)

Is that about right?  Since '10' literally includes the best in the world.  
A good athlete (but not excellent) relative to those standards seems still
high.  I am certainly no D-1 athlete.


                -- Level 6 --

        "I am an average runner. I can catch all easy throws and some of
        the harder ones (like hammers, blades, scoobers, etc.) I can jump
        pretty high but tend to get regularly skyed by taller players."

For the ultimate--no pun intended--gap.  How can you be an average runner?  
What does this mean in the scope of the world (again, since '10' was
all-inclusive).  Does this literally mean you're about average; i.e.,
about faster than 1/2 the folks, and slower than 1/2?  Also, how is
catching about athleticism?  Isn't catching a skill?  But, before I can
answer whether or not I'm a 6, let's look at 5...


                -- Level 5 --

        "I'm fast but there are others around me who are faster. I'm
        coordinated at catching and throwing, but do not have cat-like
        reflexes. I generally don't lay out too often. I can jump
        reasonably high but am not that competitive in that regard. I can
        catch regular throws but have difficulty with some of the harder
        ones (hammer, scoober, etc)."

Now, we've gone from an inflection point to a straight-up discontinuity.  
I would guess from the wording here: "fast but there are others around me
who are faster" is the same as "average runner".  In fact, literally
interpreted, it's equivalent to being a "world class athlete [who runs]
faster than ALMOST everybody I know," emphasis mine.  The impreciseness
here is astounding.  Also, coordination has appeared on the map again, but
somehow correlated with reflexes.  I do not possess cat-like reflexes, so
I might be a 5...But hang on...Let's keep looking.  I can't be a 5 if I
also qualify for a lower level.


                -- Level 4 --

        "I'm in good shape. I can run competitively with most people but
        am not the fastest. I catch regular throws but have difficulty
        with some of the weirder ones (no spin push pass, scoober, etc.)"

Now, conditioning enters the picture!  I am certainly not in good shape.  
Assuming monotonicity, let's move on.


                -- Level 3 --

        "I'm in decent shape, but am slow or coming off an injury."

So...There are only 2 conceivable reasons to be in worse shape than
"good": either I'm naturally slow, or I'm injured.  Those seem to be
retaded choices.  But I am not in decent shape, though I can't figure out
what that means.


                -- Level 2 --

        "I'm uncoordinated and slow, but in decent shape."

Not even sure who this addresses.  Who is in "decent shape", but
uncoordinated & slow?  I'm not in decent shape (which is identical to
level 3).  I'm not necessarily uncoordinated.  And while not the slowest,
could probably reasonably be considered slow.


                -- Level 1 --

        "I'm uncoordinated, slow, and out of shape. But I'm willing to try
        hard!"

I'm definitely out of shape.  I'm slow-ish.  I may try hard.  This seems
like the best fit.

Does this help?  And, don't even get me started on the skills...Next year,
I'm putting myself down as a '3' there.  Read your own webpages sometime.  
Also, congrats on the N-sat thing.  No idea how you solved that problem
without understanding something as simple as "orthogonality" (see
skills/athleticism rating versus just athleticism).  But good luck with
your world domination.


        Yours in mathematics,
        Troy 

• Log in to read full content