Olympics, who's watching ?

[Yambo]

Yusuf Dikeç has become a local hero here and a worldwide celeb after getting silver in the 10 metre air pistol yesterday. No fancy glasses, no ear defenders ( just roll up ear plugs) and keeps his left hand in his pocket (to prevent movement/fidgeting I guess).

A retired NCO in the Jandarme, he only started competition shooting a few years ago. Most definitely Mr Cool, he doesn't appear to be under any pressure at all. His pistol appeared to be a Steyr, and I noticed it was on half pressure - it won't have been cheap!

[Mr. Dazzle]

[Count Steer]

Watching the archery again. It's v impressive. I'd need binoculars to see the bull's eye/10.

I reckon Robin Hood must have been a Korean.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Wait until you see the blind archers in the Paralympics

[Count Steer]

Wait until you see the blind archers in the Paralympics

It's one of those events that seems impossible given the variables. I just saw the flags fluttering and even the slightest of breezes must be hard to compensate for. The arrows must be incredibly consistent too.

Respect to the bow and arrow wielders.

[Yorick]

Wait until you see the blind archers in the Paralympics

The Irish team sent a guy for Catch The Javelin competition

[Mr. Dazzle]

The arrows must be incredibly consistent too.

The Archer's paradox always strikes me as something which should make it impossible to hit anything

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer%27 ... ull%20draw.

[Count Steer]

The arrows must be incredibly consistent too.

The Archer's paradox always strikes me as something which should make it impossible to hit anything

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer%27 ... ull%20draw.

Well, you'd probably hit something.

(Just found out what that little lever thing is that moves immediately before the release. It's a 'clicker' that indicates you've reached a full draw - consistently. I've been looking to see if we have a local club. I fancy having a go. ).

[Screwdriver]

The arrows must be incredibly consistent too.

The Archer's paradox always strikes me as something which should make it impossible to hit anything

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer%27 ... ull%20draw.

It is an extraordinary human ability on display. Years of practice, experience, muscle memory, skill and often insane levels of athleticism most of us can only dream of.

That is what the Olympics is all about surely?

I wish I had watched that chap on the bicycle thing. Sounds like it was one of those incredible moments in sport like Hamilton winning the British GP the other day.

[Yorick]

Just watching the highlights. Well lowlights really

I never realised how dull trampolining is
Then fucking horse jumping.

Poo

[Screwdriver]

True enough, but gusset distribution works the same in terms of chess players from differing nations. Hence why Russia and the US chuck up a lot of champions and Gibraltar doesn't. Bigger pool, innit. Do we then create a different class for smaller nations?

End of the day, chess is a cerebral contest and the field, as I see it, is level enough. Hence why you regularly get 12 year-olds becoming Grand Masters. I doubt even J.K. Rowling could be arsed to post on Twitter as far as mixed chess matches go.

I am somewhat baffled at your argument here, I don't know what you are arguing for or against. No idea what the 12 year old grand master comment is all about. I'm guessing you're making some casual insult against JK Rowling for daring to suggest that men are not women so I am kinda on her side wrt to that scientific fact!

First off let's just call it a bell curve to keep your spell checker happy and secondly, that's really not how the probabilities for assessing outliers or sigma 4+ events works. As an example say you have two countries. One with a population of 1million, one with 100million. How many "one in a million genius" top players would you expect from each? Yeah statistically you might suggest 1 from one country vs. 100 from the other.

So far so what but even in a competition between these 101 "one in a million" geniuses, only one of them is going to win. You might say then if their porobability for winning is based exactly on their relative intelligence as suggested by the bell curve, that ONE individual is the sort of genius who turns up "one in a hundred million".

How many of those "one in a hundred million" geniuses turn up in a population of 1million? Well, these are mere probabilities but you can't have 1/100th of a person, so you might wait for the generations to churn over ( once every 100 years) and produce such a genius once every ten thousand years from a 1million population for example.

I'm just going to take a flying guess there might be 100 times more male chess players than female. I have no evidence for such a figure but I guess it's within an order of magnitude. I assume the competitive nature of the game simply does not appeal to the neurotypical female.

The thrust of this argument being:
1.you ask "should we create a different class for different nations". I don't know if we should but of course we certainly do! There is a British chess champion, Scottish, Welsh, Irish etc. I am surprised you didn't consider that.

2. These "classes" as you call them or sub selections from the normal population allow players to compete within a class of their peers and give them some hope of becoming a "champion" in that class. The British chess champion.

3. Without having a sub selection, our British "hero" is going to be "the hundred and eleventy fifth" best player in the world. Thats a difficult pill to swallow. No fun, no glory, no medals, no championship. Probably not ever! That is why we sub divide. Gives people hope. Everybody likes a gong.

4. So women are not inferior, there just aren't that many of them playing chess and if there is no separate tournament exclusively for women, the best woman is going to find it tough to break into the top 100 in an open tournament.**

5. The transgender thing. Since in chess it does not matter what sex a player may be or believe themselves to be I could not give a flying fuck if a bloke wants to put on a dress and play against women. He/she/they/it has no god given natural advantage unless it turns into a fight (!) and the skew in statistical probabilities for him being the "one in a million" does not apply. The bigger the population the more likely the winner will be found within it but the bigger the population the less likely it is to be you!

And yes, currently I am experiencing a period of insomnia. This sort of thing really helps though...



**Serena Williams (SP?) probably the greatest female tennis player of all time would struggle to break into the top 400 male players. So it would be a real shame if women had to play against the men in a free for all. Similarly, it would be (is?) a greater shame for men to play in the women's league due to their extreme physical advantage.

[Screwdriver]

Self defence yes. Skills based combat sports yes. Attempting to deliberately hurt women with overt physical violence in full-contact boxing/MMA, no.

Who do they think they are? Men?

You realise you're just another bloke telling women what they should and shouldn't do.

If women want to go into combat sports they have every right to do so. However, if there needs to be a controlling body for those sports then it shouldn't allow men to compete agaInst women. It is grossly unfair.

Just as you are being unfair by saying they shouldn't be allowed to compete in those sports. You're a misogynist.

Well that's annoying for you to edit my actual comment and argue out of context before casually throwing an insult. Very disappointing. I thought you were better than that. Here is what I actually said:

For me it's a moot point. I honestly don't care if this person is male or female. I don't think women should be fighting each other in the first place. Period.

Self defence yes. Skills based combat sports yes. Attempting to deliberately hurt women with overt physical violence in full-contact boxing/MMA, no.


Since I have no power or authority here, clearly I am expressing an opinion rather than issuing an instruction. I am not telling anyone what to do, I am telling you what I think.

You on the other hand are falling into the trap of telling me what I think. Next time ask.

[Dodgy69]

I thought the BMX girl was brilliant. She steamed through all the rounds I saw, god knows how it works but won them with ease. Then in the final her start was poor and she ended well back.

But...her attitude was fantastic, still smiling, great to see.

[MrLongbeard]

What the heck.
In the swimming relay races, a team can qualify through the rounds, but the country can then field a different team for the final?

[Count Steer]

What the heck.
In the swimming relay races, a team can qualify through the rounds, but the country can then field a different team for the final?

It does seem odd but I suppose it's a team medal so you can perm any 4 from the whole team for any round. (However, that means that everyone on the team roster that competes in the associated strokes/distance should get a medal...and I don't even know if anyone from the heats that isn't used in the final does. ).

Edit: just had a squizz at the rules. I suspect it's a loophole type thing.

[wheelnut]

Just watching the highlights. Well lowlights really

I never realised how dull trampolining is

We did win the gold though.

That’s 3 on the bounce.

[Count Steer]

Cycling road race is shaping up nicely.

[weeksy]

So tomorrow is the big Cycling Road Race. Pretty much the best of the best.

Mathieu van der Poel is favourite at 11/4 with the 2 Belgians next Remco Evenepoel, and Wout van Aert at 11/2 and 6/1.

I could see the Belgians doing it with team-work but they're going to have to agree between themselves which of them gets the chance to attack and when.

It's a uppy downy course and lots of hard kickers in it.


I'm going with van der Poel personally and i think by minutes rather than seconds.

Mathieu van der Poel (NED) to Win by 30 Seconds or More @ 7/1 i think is a decent bet IMO.

Glad I never put that on. VdP isn't quite there Evenepoel is though.

Crowds are huge!!!!

[Nordboy]

So tomorrow is the big Cycling Road Race. Pretty much the best of the best.

Mathieu van der Poel is favourite at 11/4 with the 2 Belgians next Remco Evenepoel, and Wout van Aert at 11/2 and 6/1.

I could see the Belgians doing it with team-work but they're going to have to agree between themselves which of them gets the chance to attack and when.

It's a uppy downy course and lots of hard kickers in it.


I'm going with van der Poel personally and i think by minutes rather than seconds.

Mathieu van der Poel (NED) to Win by 30 Seconds or More @ 7/1 i think is a decent bet IMO.

Glad I never put that on. VdP isn't quite there Evenepoel is though.

Crowds are huge!!!!

11.5km to go and it looks like he may have it in the bag, that was pretty decisive and the french rider had nothing in reply. The 2nd group aren't making any ground at the moment

[Count Steer]

Nice to see Alaphilippe again.

Oh my!