Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Essay about reasons that a guy finds watching hockey to be boring

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    4,381


    Default Essay about reasons that a guy finds watching hockey to be boring

    http://www.garlikov.com/philosophy/hockey.htm

    I've had this conversation hundreds of times, and it's never been longer than about 4 or 5 stupid, opinionated comments. But yet, here's a guy who wrote this hugely elaborate essay on the matter. I just find that interesting.

    I like hockey, but I find myself agreeing with a lot of the points he makes, which I also find interesting. If you don't like hockey, skim some of the points he makes in mid-section of the essay and tell me what you think.
    Last edited by bighead384; 04-02-2013 at 09:41 PM.
    When they said "sit down", I stood up.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    18,090


    Default

    Not only is it really strange that someone would choose to write such a detailed, serious article about something as frivolous as watching televised sports, but it was dumb. It read as though he's an impatient child who needs constant scoring for his interest to be kept.

    Baseball and American football aren't that much more high-scoring than ice hockey, either. In a given NFL game, each team will score an average of 21 pts, or 3 touchdowns; in the MLB, a team will score just shy of 5 points per game; and in the NHL, teams average between 3 and 4 goals per game. Soccer/football is the only real exception here, in which the average score is around 1 point per game - and in basketball, teams score constantly.

    He also says that in hockey, a game can be 4-1 early in the first period and that decides it; it's pretty much over. Umm, the same happens in American football and baseball. If a baseball team is up 6-1 at the end of the third inning, it's probably over. If an American football team is up like 35-7 halfway through the second quarter, it's probably over. In all these situations, a comeback is possible, but not likely.
    Quote Originally Posted by jsmak84 View Post
    I do not drink alcohol and coffee

    I do not smoke and do not do drugs

    I just do bumpin in my trunk

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,165


    Default

    Obviously, the reason watching hockey is boring is because in real hockey, they don't do the Flying V or the Statue of Liberty...
    ___________________________________________

    All the Beautiful Things you do

    Respect my authoritah !

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Transmetropolitan
    Posts
    6,452


    Default

    Or do they?
    I wrote a four word letter.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,165


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebDudette View Post
    Or do they?
    This is great thanks !
    ___________________________________________

    All the Beautiful Things you do

    Respect my authoritah !

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cascadian Exile
    Posts
    19,609


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Llamas View Post
    Not only is it really strange that someone would choose to write such a detailed, serious article about something as frivolous as watching televised sports, but it was dumb. It read as though he's an impatient child who needs constant scoring for his interest to be kept.

    Baseball and American football aren't that much more high-scoring than ice hockey, either. In a given NFL game, each team will score an average of 21 pts, or 3 touchdowns; in the MLB, a team will score just shy of 5 points per game; and in the NHL, teams average between 3 and 4 goals per game. Soccer/football is the only real exception here, in which the average score is around 1 point per game - and in basketball, teams score constantly.

    He also says that in hockey, a game can be 4-1 early in the first period and that decides it; it's pretty much over. Umm, the same happens in American football and baseball. If a baseball team is up 6-1 at the end of the third inning, it's probably over. If an American football team is up like 35-7 halfway through the second quarter, it's probably over. In all these situations, a comeback is possible, but not likely.
    This completely. Less points in a game means that every potential point situation is nerve-wracking and tense. I mean it sucks when they don't score in soccer, but that doesn't mean I didn't spend 90 min. fidgeting nervously and death-clenching my beer/teeth when a team nears the goal area.
    Quote Originally Posted by T-6005 View Post
    I do no be following, fortune prick me if I do no.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    4,381


    Default

    I think the biggest problem is that: every play that doesn't result in a goal is largely inconsequential. Sure, if you're dominating the game, you'll have more momentum and so forth. But still: about 85-90% percent of the plays do not result in a numerical score and thus are largely inconsequential.

    Also, while I suppose it would be best to search for research on the subject, I would tend to disagree with your assessment on the likelihood of comebacks in various sports. My impression is that in hockey, if a team is down 4 or more goals, a comeback will happen only about 5% of the time. But in a similar situation in baseball, say if a team is down 6-0 at the end of the third inning, a comeback seems much more likely (perhaps around 11-14%). You can always tire out the starting pitcher and get to their shitty relief player. As long you can get men on base, there is a chance to at away at chunks of the lead.
    When they said "sit down", I stood up.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cascadian Exile
    Posts
    19,609


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bighead384 View Post
    I think the biggest problem is that: every play that doesn't result in a goal is largely inconsequential. Sure, if you're dominating the game, you'll have more momentum and so forth. But still: about 85-90% percent of the plays do not result in a numerical score and thus are largely inconsequential.
    But if every play results in a goal, then the goals and the plays themselves are meaningless. Take handball, they practically score in every run. To win in handball is basically about making sure the other team misses a goal, points are irrelevant.

    The plays themselves are important because they are an opportunity, the possibility of a goal is always there in soccer. A comeback from 2-0 is not unheard of, it's not even very implausible. But can you imagine the excitement of a single goal in a game that will likely only have 3 goals total? That one goal is important, its crucial. That it could potentially happen every time the ball nears the goal, that's tension. Every single goal is important, so the possibility of that goal immediately raises the stakes. Whereas in high-point games one point here or there is inconsequential. Ironically, the more points per game, the more pointless they are.
    Quote Originally Posted by T-6005 View Post
    I do no be following, fortune prick me if I do no.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Transmetropolitan
    Posts
    6,452


    Default

    There is constant action in hockey and soccer. That is why I tend to like them more than baseball and football. Not sure why I don't like basketball.
    I wrote a four word letter.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Come on and raise up.
    Posts
    3,887


    Default

    Watching hockey isn't boring, but it is rather depressing if you're a Canes fan right now
    "LIVE OR DIE, MAN??"

    "DIE!!!!!"

    "WRONG! HOOOONK!"

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •