Trying not to get totally sidelined by the Obameter!
My God I wish all the Presidents had one of these... It would have been amazing to watch the Bushes break promises, or see more clearly Reagan and Clinton's agendas.
This is truly our first 21st Century President, now being held accountable to every campaign promise, in the golden light of free speech and public access. That is a good definition of transparency, and certainly everything Obama's Administration does to address this extant challenge will set precedent.
So lets see the score card for what it really is:
TOTAL PROMISES:
515
PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED (Jan ~ Oct [so about ten months]):
36% (185/515)
PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED KEPT:
25% (47/185)
PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED COMPROMISED:
6% (12/185)
PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED BROKEN:
4% (7/185)
PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED STALLED:
6% (12/185)
PERCENTAGE IN THE WORK (ADDRESSED and TOTAL):
ADDRESSED; 58% (107/185)
TOTAL; 21% (107/515)
***
Now lets assign a number of time to this data set: we could argue that it has only been ten months, and 10/48 is about 21%. For simplicity lets say that some political capital has been expended and that this report card is emblemic of about one years worth of future work load-- or 25%.
Lets assume a similar rate of success/failure per annum:
9.125% KEPT
2.33% COMPROMISED
1.35% BROKEN
20.777% IN PROCESS
We then get this matrix:
1 2 3 4
KEPT 47 94 141 188
COMPROMISED 12 24 36 48
BROKEN 7 14 21 28
STALLED 12 24 36 48
PROCESS 107 214 281 203
UNSTARTED 330 145 0 0
Which translates to:
By year three all promises will have been addressed. If we count compromises as promises kept thats about a 46% success rate, or without compromise about a .365 batting average-- not bad.
5.44% of promises are broken, and 9.32% are "stalled." If we assume these to be the same we come up with a cumulative 14.76% failure rate.
At this same rate of progress, assuming a re-election, adding an additional 31 promises then by year eight:
5 6 7
KEPT 235 282 329
COMPROMISED 60 72 84
BROKEN 35 42 49
STALLED 60 72 84
PROCESS 125 78 0
That would leave year eight to hammer through the 84 pieces of stalled business and run the new candidate slates.
It translates to the following baseball stats:
Kept .603
Comp .154
Broke .090
Stall .153
I know this methodology is simplistic, but to imagine a President held this accountable that someone like me can do the baseball math-- and to imagine a President who can keep his or her word 75% of the time in the light of public scrutiny-- is a good start.
Showing posts with label Sports Records. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sports Records. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Congratulations Bonds
The 10-year T-Bill is at 4.85% and Barry just hit 756.
Regarding this milestone, I have just three nouns for the cynics, such as myself, the main distinction being I am a realist: Michael Jordan, Wal-Mart, and World Cup.
MJ
What MJ represents to me is that Americans aren't above changing the rules to get more excitement from their sports.
I was in high school basketball, just out of boy scouts, when I bought the first edition of Michael Jordan Nike hightops. Wore them in a couple of games, and wore those suckers for three years after that. They made great hacky sack shoes by the time they hit their second year.
Unlike hacky sack, where the object is to cooperate in a group to maintain a harmonious flow, Americans love the win-lose paradigm. I know I do. It creates drama of the microcosm, and thus we can project our grey, sublime, and complex lives into the checker, or chess, board of good and evil.
I remember playing basketball most of my natural life when they changed the traveling rules for Jordan.
Before Jordan (BJ… although that might not stick as a notation of time beyond this article), to leap to the basket to dunk (or otherwise), was one step from your pivot foot and up. As a track guy, it felt similar in nature to the hop-skip-jump.
After Jordan (AJ?), one could count the first step from the pivot as firing the engines on the space shuttle, before it flies off the pad, and then "take your one step." That was more like the Long-jump!
Although some people may have now lived their entire youth sport career not knowing that this would have been traveling in Bill Russell's day, it was. Now by the AJ rules its not.
And the reason they changed rules for Jordan? Asses in seats and eyeballs on the TV. It sells soap.
They changed other rules for Jordan, so he could seem an impressive player, rather than a hyperactive overly aggressive anomaly of a physical specimen.
Eventually, any announcer covering Jordan also got to take a waiver on thought and continue assertions of his phenomenal excellence using global hyperbole without regard to game action—after the rule changes. Had they not changed the rules the whistle would blow for traveling and "hand checking" every minute he played his phenomenal career.
It doesn't deprive him of his stellar performances within those rule changes, but Bill Russell he was not.
Around that time, in the early nineties, baseball had to do something to win back some asses and eyeballs. Those of you who paid attention know that is the evolution of the advent of steroids in baseball.
Not steroids in baseball, like a cortisone shot to reduce inflammation… I would guess Tommy John probably took that. Rather the hyped up home-run derbies, and the orgasmic race to have two batters in one season attempting to smash single season the home run record (McGuire/Sosa).
Never you mind that their arms were thicker than the average man's leg, we were living AJ (or more pressingly during the Jordan era, and therefore in order to boost ad revenues something had to be done, dammit).
Bonds is in that kettle of fish. Unfortunate for him that he hasn't just had his ass kissed endlessly by the media, like Jordan. Or is that the way he wants it?
It is American tastes, commerce, and lack of any sense of long-standing tradition, which dictated this derailment that would in later years have the same public scramble like a presidential candidate to dust under the rug his follies with drugs and/or alcohol in order to represent a wholesome image—but we could never elect someone like that. Admit it America, you loved the '90's, and now you want to put an asterisk next to this guy?
I'll take Gwynn or Ripkin, and their consistency and brand building statistics any day, and so will the Hall of Fame.
Wal-Mart
In the super-size me culture, it is obvious why although an asterisk he may be, again America deserves the same asterisk.
In the film Super-Size Me there was a very down the rabbit hole moment when he is eating his first supersized combo meal, and stops to vomit, and then after a moment finished the meal. I bring that up, not only because it was surreal, and the only thing I laughed at, but also because you think the guy would have said to himself at that juncture, "Maybe this film is not the best thing I could do for my body?"
Yet he made the film depicting how corporate consumer culture is poisoning people willing to be poisoned (such as the filmmaker himself). Wow. I think about five decades worth of evidence against Tobacco Industry could also show that.
So should it be such a stretch where everything is done bigger, better, and cheaper, NO MATTER WHAT THE COST, that our sports stars should listen to stupid people and do stupid things?
I mention Wal-Mart because although three quarters of the nation would be happy to get into their vehicles and go to the local regional store 5 to 25 miles away in order to buy cheap goods manufactured overseas, I would bet another three quarters of the nation would not want Wal-Mart to place the next monstrosity in their town, city, or back yard. Do the math—something doesn't make sense— we are a culture of convenience. Add to that list convenient thinking.
Somewhere between home runs 400 and 600 (although am not looking up his stats, but again during the time when Jordan played basketball, lets say), Bonds was part of the overall situation which actively encouraged and desired Baseball athletes to do just a little bit more for the sport. Take one for the team.
I don't remember hearing any of the protests we hear now about steroids?
And if you say you didn't know, you either didn't pay attention, don't understand human health, or you have an under valued sense of self. Do you imagine that anyone can beef up like that without some chemical help?
I can only forgive anyone who admits they didn't care. That is an honest American answer!
World Cup
Although if we were really to make an effort at it, I am confident America would be consistent winners in a true professional level international challenge, the fact remains we have a myopia about our "World" Series, which belies our national attitude about our national pastime.
Baseball is one of the biggest sport exports, next to basketball, that America has given to the world. That said, like basketball, Americans attitude towards any international team or league seems somewhere between, "Aw, isn't that cute," and slightly fearful that if they let the skinny nerd play then he might actually make a play which would embarrass the hell out of them.
Like rules, and ethics, a fair sense of tradition can be part and parcel to the successful Internationalization of our National Game.
Without those, there is no hope for our World Series, or some other similar event, to ever approximate the Soccer World Cup.
The English invented a game which rules, ethics, and tradition do not encumber the export of the sport, rather are part and parcel of the product being exported, adopted, and accepted by the World.
I believe in another twenty years Bonds and his record (in tact or not) will also be viewed in this light of Baseball emerging onto the International scene, and the anomaly of performance enhancing drug use will be some aspect of that nascence.
*asterisk
All said and done, Hank Aaron is no longer the bell weather.
But what is a home run really worth? Is that metric the measure of the most winning team? No. It just means wherever Bonds was your team at least got some Runs on the board. It didn't mean you would have Rings on your fingers (like if you compare QB Pass and TD stats in Football—Montana, Elway, Brady, et. al.).
Bonds' team lost in San Diego, where we normally mock him, when he tied the record. We were civil, and applauded the achievement—nothing better than knowing your main rival's are actually good players (regardless of their team record). And the man who caught the ball (755) that tied the 33-year record was 33 years old.
The Giants actually lost the lead 756 gave them to the Nationals. The pitch was by the son of a pitcher who had pitched to Henry Aaron back in his twilight days when the record mark was stuck at 755 to never be moved until yesterday.
Baseball is ultimately a game of numbers and probabilities. Those are just some of the stats Fibonacci would have been proud of.
It also means there are no asterisks, even if eventually Bonds is indicted or proven guilty… until then enjoy the moment.
Congratulations.
Regarding this milestone, I have just three nouns for the cynics, such as myself, the main distinction being I am a realist: Michael Jordan, Wal-Mart, and World Cup.
MJ
What MJ represents to me is that Americans aren't above changing the rules to get more excitement from their sports.
I was in high school basketball, just out of boy scouts, when I bought the first edition of Michael Jordan Nike hightops. Wore them in a couple of games, and wore those suckers for three years after that. They made great hacky sack shoes by the time they hit their second year.
Unlike hacky sack, where the object is to cooperate in a group to maintain a harmonious flow, Americans love the win-lose paradigm. I know I do. It creates drama of the microcosm, and thus we can project our grey, sublime, and complex lives into the checker, or chess, board of good and evil.
I remember playing basketball most of my natural life when they changed the traveling rules for Jordan.
Before Jordan (BJ… although that might not stick as a notation of time beyond this article), to leap to the basket to dunk (or otherwise), was one step from your pivot foot and up. As a track guy, it felt similar in nature to the hop-skip-jump.
After Jordan (AJ?), one could count the first step from the pivot as firing the engines on the space shuttle, before it flies off the pad, and then "take your one step." That was more like the Long-jump!
Although some people may have now lived their entire youth sport career not knowing that this would have been traveling in Bill Russell's day, it was. Now by the AJ rules its not.
And the reason they changed rules for Jordan? Asses in seats and eyeballs on the TV. It sells soap.
They changed other rules for Jordan, so he could seem an impressive player, rather than a hyperactive overly aggressive anomaly of a physical specimen.
Eventually, any announcer covering Jordan also got to take a waiver on thought and continue assertions of his phenomenal excellence using global hyperbole without regard to game action—after the rule changes. Had they not changed the rules the whistle would blow for traveling and "hand checking" every minute he played his phenomenal career.
It doesn't deprive him of his stellar performances within those rule changes, but Bill Russell he was not.
Around that time, in the early nineties, baseball had to do something to win back some asses and eyeballs. Those of you who paid attention know that is the evolution of the advent of steroids in baseball.
Not steroids in baseball, like a cortisone shot to reduce inflammation… I would guess Tommy John probably took that. Rather the hyped up home-run derbies, and the orgasmic race to have two batters in one season attempting to smash single season the home run record (McGuire/Sosa).
Never you mind that their arms were thicker than the average man's leg, we were living AJ (or more pressingly during the Jordan era, and therefore in order to boost ad revenues something had to be done, dammit).
Bonds is in that kettle of fish. Unfortunate for him that he hasn't just had his ass kissed endlessly by the media, like Jordan. Or is that the way he wants it?
It is American tastes, commerce, and lack of any sense of long-standing tradition, which dictated this derailment that would in later years have the same public scramble like a presidential candidate to dust under the rug his follies with drugs and/or alcohol in order to represent a wholesome image—but we could never elect someone like that. Admit it America, you loved the '90's, and now you want to put an asterisk next to this guy?
I'll take Gwynn or Ripkin, and their consistency and brand building statistics any day, and so will the Hall of Fame.
Wal-Mart
In the super-size me culture, it is obvious why although an asterisk he may be, again America deserves the same asterisk.
In the film Super-Size Me there was a very down the rabbit hole moment when he is eating his first supersized combo meal, and stops to vomit, and then after a moment finished the meal. I bring that up, not only because it was surreal, and the only thing I laughed at, but also because you think the guy would have said to himself at that juncture, "Maybe this film is not the best thing I could do for my body?"
Yet he made the film depicting how corporate consumer culture is poisoning people willing to be poisoned (such as the filmmaker himself). Wow. I think about five decades worth of evidence against Tobacco Industry could also show that.
So should it be such a stretch where everything is done bigger, better, and cheaper, NO MATTER WHAT THE COST, that our sports stars should listen to stupid people and do stupid things?
I mention Wal-Mart because although three quarters of the nation would be happy to get into their vehicles and go to the local regional store 5 to 25 miles away in order to buy cheap goods manufactured overseas, I would bet another three quarters of the nation would not want Wal-Mart to place the next monstrosity in their town, city, or back yard. Do the math—something doesn't make sense— we are a culture of convenience. Add to that list convenient thinking.
Somewhere between home runs 400 and 600 (although am not looking up his stats, but again during the time when Jordan played basketball, lets say), Bonds was part of the overall situation which actively encouraged and desired Baseball athletes to do just a little bit more for the sport. Take one for the team.
I don't remember hearing any of the protests we hear now about steroids?
And if you say you didn't know, you either didn't pay attention, don't understand human health, or you have an under valued sense of self. Do you imagine that anyone can beef up like that without some chemical help?
I can only forgive anyone who admits they didn't care. That is an honest American answer!
World Cup
Although if we were really to make an effort at it, I am confident America would be consistent winners in a true professional level international challenge, the fact remains we have a myopia about our "World" Series, which belies our national attitude about our national pastime.
Baseball is one of the biggest sport exports, next to basketball, that America has given to the world. That said, like basketball, Americans attitude towards any international team or league seems somewhere between, "Aw, isn't that cute," and slightly fearful that if they let the skinny nerd play then he might actually make a play which would embarrass the hell out of them.
Like rules, and ethics, a fair sense of tradition can be part and parcel to the successful Internationalization of our National Game.
Without those, there is no hope for our World Series, or some other similar event, to ever approximate the Soccer World Cup.
The English invented a game which rules, ethics, and tradition do not encumber the export of the sport, rather are part and parcel of the product being exported, adopted, and accepted by the World.
I believe in another twenty years Bonds and his record (in tact or not) will also be viewed in this light of Baseball emerging onto the International scene, and the anomaly of performance enhancing drug use will be some aspect of that nascence.
*asterisk
All said and done, Hank Aaron is no longer the bell weather.
But what is a home run really worth? Is that metric the measure of the most winning team? No. It just means wherever Bonds was your team at least got some Runs on the board. It didn't mean you would have Rings on your fingers (like if you compare QB Pass and TD stats in Football—Montana, Elway, Brady, et. al.).
Bonds' team lost in San Diego, where we normally mock him, when he tied the record. We were civil, and applauded the achievement—nothing better than knowing your main rival's are actually good players (regardless of their team record). And the man who caught the ball (755) that tied the 33-year record was 33 years old.
The Giants actually lost the lead 756 gave them to the Nationals. The pitch was by the son of a pitcher who had pitched to Henry Aaron back in his twilight days when the record mark was stuck at 755 to never be moved until yesterday.
Baseball is ultimately a game of numbers and probabilities. Those are just some of the stats Fibonacci would have been proud of.
It also means there are no asterisks, even if eventually Bonds is indicted or proven guilty… until then enjoy the moment.
Congratulations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)