Well, that's the final over with.
It was a really close game. So close, in fact, that one looks to factors that otherwise might not be so important; in this case, the referees. In the beginning of the first period, we watched Chris Pronger run an American player headfirst into the boards from behind: a minor penalty plus a ten-minute misconduct under international rules. Not called. Moments later, Ryan Getzlaf charges a player who's nowhere near the puck. Not called. By the second period, we'd already lost count of the number of egregious Canadian fouls that went uncalled.
Hardly surprising, really, when you consider that both referees were Canadian. It's the Olympic final, and both referees are from one of the countries playing in it.
Seriously speaking, could this be done in any other organized sport? Throughout the tournament, Canada benefited from the referees' special treatment, but getting two "home" referees in the final is just outrageous. We're not sure what that is, but it isn't sport.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
Vancouver, semifinals
So, we got the elimination games right, but the quarterfinals gave us a few surprises. Both of our mistakes, we believe, were down to not guessing that the teams in question were done in the tournament before the games started.
A lot of ink has been spilled, and a lot of commentators, not least of whom is Finland's own irritatingly clueless Niki Juusela, have gushed hysterically over how wonderfully Canada played against Russia. We didn't really see that at all; what we saw was a Russian team that didn't seem to be one bit interested in playing. That game wasn't Canada being great, or even particularly good; it was Russia being worse than they've ever been under Bykov. It was astonishing to watch them "play". Our prediction was based on the idea that the Russians wanted to win this tournament. Turns out we were wrong!
As a side note, had the referees actually called penalties for, say, boarding and checking from behind, Canada would have spent the entire first period in the box. In the very first shift, Maxim Afinogenov got run into the boards from behind. No penalty was called, and that was the line throughout. We'd really like to see an international hockey tournament that had any consistent refereeing at all.
The same goes for Sweden. We thought they'd run out of steam in the semis and end up in the bronze game, but they already ran out in the quarterfinals. We don't want to take anything away from Slovakia, who played an excellent game, but really, Sweden didn't even look like they particularly wanted to win.
**
With our quarterfinal record at a dismal 50%, it's time to take some semifinal guesses.
We believe USA-Finland is a very simple equation. Finland was shut out by Sweden and only managed one garbage goal against the Czechs. A large reason for this is head coach Jukka Jalonen's moronic insistence on playing the Saku Koivu - Teemu Selänne - Olli Jokinen power play combination, which has been totally unable to even set up scoring chances in the last two games. In spite of this, every time Finland got a power play against the Czechs, Jalonen put the same crew on the ice, and they continued to, frankly, suck.
We anticipate Jalonen will do the same, effectively scuppering Finland's minuscule chances to score. Unless he has a change of heart, or the Finnish team decides to show up again like they did in the first two games, Miller will shut Finland out. Whatever the exact score, though, Finland will end up in the bronze medal game.
As for the other game, we'd be mad not to bet on Canada. The only real chance Slovakia has is that the Canadians may get ahead of themselves and get their head in the final game while they should still be playing the Slovaks. So while there's a chance for a Slovak upset, we have to say Canada.
A lot of ink has been spilled, and a lot of commentators, not least of whom is Finland's own irritatingly clueless Niki Juusela, have gushed hysterically over how wonderfully Canada played against Russia. We didn't really see that at all; what we saw was a Russian team that didn't seem to be one bit interested in playing. That game wasn't Canada being great, or even particularly good; it was Russia being worse than they've ever been under Bykov. It was astonishing to watch them "play". Our prediction was based on the idea that the Russians wanted to win this tournament. Turns out we were wrong!
As a side note, had the referees actually called penalties for, say, boarding and checking from behind, Canada would have spent the entire first period in the box. In the very first shift, Maxim Afinogenov got run into the boards from behind. No penalty was called, and that was the line throughout. We'd really like to see an international hockey tournament that had any consistent refereeing at all.
The same goes for Sweden. We thought they'd run out of steam in the semis and end up in the bronze game, but they already ran out in the quarterfinals. We don't want to take anything away from Slovakia, who played an excellent game, but really, Sweden didn't even look like they particularly wanted to win.
**
With our quarterfinal record at a dismal 50%, it's time to take some semifinal guesses.
We believe USA-Finland is a very simple equation. Finland was shut out by Sweden and only managed one garbage goal against the Czechs. A large reason for this is head coach Jukka Jalonen's moronic insistence on playing the Saku Koivu - Teemu Selänne - Olli Jokinen power play combination, which has been totally unable to even set up scoring chances in the last two games. In spite of this, every time Finland got a power play against the Czechs, Jalonen put the same crew on the ice, and they continued to, frankly, suck.
We anticipate Jalonen will do the same, effectively scuppering Finland's minuscule chances to score. Unless he has a change of heart, or the Finnish team decides to show up again like they did in the first two games, Miller will shut Finland out. Whatever the exact score, though, Finland will end up in the bronze medal game.
As for the other game, we'd be mad not to bet on Canada. The only real chance Slovakia has is that the Canadians may get ahead of themselves and get their head in the final game while they should still be playing the Slovaks. So while there's a chance for a Slovak upset, we have to say Canada.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Why I am not going to read China Miéville
Earlier in this blag, I wrote about why I'm not going to read Jared Diamond, and in the same spirit, I thought I'd say a few words about why I'm not going to read China Miéville, either.
There's a lot of things that make me ill-disposed toward him. For starters, this is what Miéville had to say about Tolkien:
There's a lot of things that make me ill-disposed toward him. For starters, this is what Miéville had to say about Tolkien:
Tolkien is the wen on the arse of fantasy literature. His oeuvre is massive and contagious - you can't ignore it, so don't even try. The best you can do is consciously try to lance the boil. And there's a lot to dislike - his cod-Wagnerian pomposity, his boys-own-adventure glorying in war, his small-minded and reactionary love for hierarchical status-quos, his belief in absolute morality that blurs moral and political complexity. Tolkien's clichés - elves 'n' dwarfs 'n' magic rings - have spread like viruses. He wrote that the function of fantasy was 'consolation', thereby making it an article of policy that a fantasy writer should mollycoddle the reader.
In short, Miéville repeats the tired old Marxist critique of Tolkien, which I've always felt is largely based on not bothering to read him. I would submit that anyone who thinks Tolkien's works can be described as "boys-own-adventure glorying in war" cannot actually have read the Lord of the Rings, let alone the Silmarillion, or certainly not with any other purpose that to find things to vilify in them.
That Miéville should regurgitate a Marxist critique that was inaccurate and fairly pathetic even when it was invented is hardly surprising, as the man describes himself, hilariously, as a Trotskyist. He's even stood for the House of Commons on that platform, and unsurprisingly, has failed.
For all these reasons, I've always suspected there might be something wrong with the man, and a surprising confluence of things has absolutely confirmed my opinion. As it happens, I've posted about seasteading a couple of times on this blag. There's a fairly good article on the topic at wired.com, in case you're unfamiliar with the movement. In brief, it means founding libertarian communities on the high seas, to escape the laws of states á la Sealand.
Mind you, I'm of two minds about seasteading; while I personally like the idea, I'm not at all sure that this is the kind of thing the libertarians of the world should be directing their energies toward. So I'm not approaching this as a die-hard partisan.
What provoked this post was the fact that China Miéville, too, has written about seasteading. He authored an article called Floating Utopias: Freedom and Unfreedom of the Seas, in a sensible and unpartisan-sounding book called Evil Paradises: Dreamworlds of Neoliberalism. The article can be found here. Here's a quote in which Mr. Miéville summarizes both libertarianism and seasteading:
Libertarianism, by contrast, is a theory of those who find it hard to avoid their taxes, who are too small, incompetent or insufficiently connected to win Iraq-reconstruction contracts, or otherwise chow at the state trough. In its maundering about a mythical ideal-type capitalism, libertarianism betrays its fear of actually existing capitalism, at which it cannot quite succeed. It is a philosophy of capitalist inadequacy.
Libertarianism’s nemesis, “the state,” is no less abstract. This is particularly so for libertarianism’s seasteading wing, for whom the political entity “the state” is bizarrely geographically literalized. Their intent is to slip the surly bonds of earth not up but sideways, beyond littoral borders. It is a lunatic syllogism: “I dislike the state: The state is made of land: Therefore I dislike the land.” Water is a solvent, dissolving “political” (state) power, leaving only “economics” behind.
I should point out that Miéville actually has a Ph.D. in international relations, and his doctoral dissertation was on the subject of international law. So by any rights, he should know perfectly well what the legal basis for seasteading is. He just chooses to ignore this and write the ham-fisted strawman attack of the second quoted paragraph. Instead of a considered legal position based on international law, and in the case of Sealand actually upheld by precedent, Miéville gives us "a lunatic syllogism".
I'm sorry, but if the man thinks this is fair treatment, I can't take anything he writes seriously. The kind of bile he's spewing in this article is just too childish to be taken seriously. Either his Ph.D. is a complete joke, or he could have presented seasteading in an intelligent, critical light, but just chose not to. If what he's written there is a fair representation of libertarianism and seasteading, then I guess Obama really is setting up death panels.
To reinforce this image, all I need to do is repost the picture Wikipedia has of him.
I believe I've found the left-wing Andy Remic. I understand his prose is better, but really, I'm past caring by now. I've never met the man, but based on everything I've read so far, he's a class-A idiot.
The real question, however, is not whether to read his books or not. I'm not going to. The real question is this: how much would you like to see a political debate between him and Andy Remic?
Vancouver: Day five and onward
This is the last post of the initial round! First we'll run through Day 5, then talk about the big games on Day 6 and see how the elimination games and quarterfinals work out.
Day 5
NOR - SUI
We said: 4-1 Switzerland.
The score: 5-4 OT Switzerland. Miss. Wow. A heck of a game, with Norway nearly taking advantage of an unexpected collapse by Switzerland.
LAT - SVK
We said: 6-2 to Slovakia.
The score: 6-0 Slovakia. Miss, but given our poor record of late, it's hearteningly close. With this game, Latvia loses the initial round. Strangely, the only team to shut Latvia out in this group was the one that had the weakest defense.
GER - BLR
We said: 4-1 Germany.
The score: 5-3 Belarus. Miss. If Switzerland struggled against Norway, Germany just plain failed. The Belarusians finally broke out their offensive skills and took the Germans somewhat by surprise, and Germany, shut out in both of its previous games, really struggled to score. We expected both Germany and Switzerland to zero in on these games as their most crucial tests in the tournament, but both were surprisingly shaky. The Germans were unable to transition from their tight defensive game to a more aggressive brand of hockey, and paid for it here.
Our record: 1-3-11; in winners and losers, 12-3.
**
And now, the big day!
Day 6
Finnish state TV is calling this "Super Sunday", and it's not so far off. Today the initial groups end and the elimination games are seeded. Also, there's some great hockey with all the proper countries facing each other.
RUS - CZE
Some excellent hockey! Highlights included a flashback to the Torino Olympics when Jagr was skating around with his head down again, and this time Ovechkin cleaned his clock to set up Russia's 3-1 goal.
We said: the Russians will take this in regulation at 5-2.
The score: 4-2 Russia. After days in a row of complete misses, finally we're close.
That completes Group B. We predicted the following group table:
Russia, 9
Slovakia, 6
Czech Republic, 3
Latvia, 0
Actually, this is how it ended up:
Russia, 7 points
Czech Republic, 6
Slovakia, 5
Latvia, 0
So apart from the Czechs and Slovaks changing places, this went pretty much like we thought.
CAN - USA
Canada controlled the game most of the time, but USA capitalized on its opportunities better, and Miller was stellar.
We said: while it's going to be a hard-fought one, we think Canada will take this one 4-3 to emerge as group winner.
The score: 5-3 USA. Miss. We really expected Team Canada to be better.
We predicted:
Canada, 9 points
USA, 6
Switzerland, 3
Norway, 0
The actual table:
USA, 9
Canada, 5
Switzerland, 3
Norway, 1
SWE - FIN
Worst game of the tournament, both for Team Finland and generally. Hopefully Finland can bounce back to next one.
We said: Finland will beat Sweden, and the Finnish press will start planning the parade route. Finland takes it 5-2.
The score: 3-0 Sweden. Miss.
Our predicted standings:
Finland, 9 points
Sweden, 6
Germany, 3
Belarus, 0
And the final outcome:
Sweden, 9 points
Finland, 6
Belarus, 3
Germany, 0
Our boys let us down, but otherwise the group went like we thought.
Our record for days five and six is one close and five misses. We aren't doing that good.
Our overall record stand at: 1-4-13; in winners and losers, 13-5.
**
Elimination games:
We thought they would be:
SWE-NOR, SWE
SVK-LAT, SVK
CZE-BLR, CZE
SUI-GER, SUI
Apart from Sweden going straight to quarterfinals and Canada not, we got the teams right, but not the seeding order. If somebody figured Canada would go to elimination games, more power to ya.
Actual elimination match-ups are:
CZE - LAT
CAN - GER
SVK - NOR
SUI - BLR
**
Our scenario is now in tatters; the final we and the rest of the hockey world predicted will not take place. So here's our revised scenario for the rest of the games!
Elimination games:
CZE - LAT
CAN - GER
SVK - NOR
SUI - BLR
We predict the team with home advantage will win each game, though Switzerland and Belarus might well take it to overtime. Obviously we're hoping Canada will stun the hockey world by getting eliminated here, but we aren't going to put any money on Germany. We won't be putting money on Canada either, with the odds our governmet betting agency is giving, offering 1.01 times your bet.
Quarterfinals, as per our prediction:
USA - SUI
SWE - SVK
RUS - CAN
FIN - CZE
USA will win their game against Switzerland, but the other ones are tough to call. Any one of the six teams can win their game.
Slovakia is a mystery to us: they lose to the Czechs but defeat Russia. Overall they haven't impressed us, but neither has Sweden. They have excellent goaltending, though: Halak and Lundqvist have been the top two goalies of the tournament so far. We think Slovakia is the worse team, and they take too much penalties. Slovakia's only chance is that the gold-laden Swedish team is not hungry enough. They looked lackluster even when beating Finland 3-0. Still, we predict Sweden will win.
The most anticipated match-up of the tournament will not take place in the finals, but in the quarterfinals. One of the two teams thought most likely to take gold will go home without a medal. We think both teams have played poorly so far. Russia looked alright in their opening game, stumbled against Slovakia, but recovered in their last game against the Czechs. Canada had trouble getting started against Norway, barely defeated Switzerland, and lost to USA. Russians seem to be improving their game, which Canada has so far failed to do. Having to play Germany won't help with that. Canada has the most pressure, and their game hasn't been very good. Unless they can make it all come together, they will lose. We predict Russia wins, hopefully by a goal by Ilya Kovalchuk.
Finland versus the Czech Republic is Finland's game to win or lose. If the team that played against Germany and Belarus shows up, Finland wins. If the joke of a team that lost to Sweden turns up, they would lose to Latvia, let alone the Czechs. We feel really bad about Finland after the last game, but we think they should be able to win this game. We predict Finland wins.
Semifinals:
USA - FIN
SWE - RUS
Much as we wish it were otherwise, we believe we'll see USA - Russia final with Sweden and Finland competing for the bronze. We think Finland will want the bronze more and win the game, and we stand by our original prediction that Russia will take gold.
Day 5
NOR - SUI
We said: 4-1 Switzerland.
The score: 5-4 OT Switzerland. Miss. Wow. A heck of a game, with Norway nearly taking advantage of an unexpected collapse by Switzerland.
LAT - SVK
We said: 6-2 to Slovakia.
The score: 6-0 Slovakia. Miss, but given our poor record of late, it's hearteningly close. With this game, Latvia loses the initial round. Strangely, the only team to shut Latvia out in this group was the one that had the weakest defense.
GER - BLR
We said: 4-1 Germany.
The score: 5-3 Belarus. Miss. If Switzerland struggled against Norway, Germany just plain failed. The Belarusians finally broke out their offensive skills and took the Germans somewhat by surprise, and Germany, shut out in both of its previous games, really struggled to score. We expected both Germany and Switzerland to zero in on these games as their most crucial tests in the tournament, but both were surprisingly shaky. The Germans were unable to transition from their tight defensive game to a more aggressive brand of hockey, and paid for it here.
Our record: 1-3-11; in winners and losers, 12-3.
**
And now, the big day!
Day 6
Finnish state TV is calling this "Super Sunday", and it's not so far off. Today the initial groups end and the elimination games are seeded. Also, there's some great hockey with all the proper countries facing each other.
RUS - CZE
Some excellent hockey! Highlights included a flashback to the Torino Olympics when Jagr was skating around with his head down again, and this time Ovechkin cleaned his clock to set up Russia's 3-1 goal.
We said: the Russians will take this in regulation at 5-2.
The score: 4-2 Russia. After days in a row of complete misses, finally we're close.
That completes Group B. We predicted the following group table:
Russia, 9
Slovakia, 6
Czech Republic, 3
Latvia, 0
Actually, this is how it ended up:
Russia, 7 points
Czech Republic, 6
Slovakia, 5
Latvia, 0
So apart from the Czechs and Slovaks changing places, this went pretty much like we thought.
CAN - USA
Canada controlled the game most of the time, but USA capitalized on its opportunities better, and Miller was stellar.
We said: while it's going to be a hard-fought one, we think Canada will take this one 4-3 to emerge as group winner.
The score: 5-3 USA. Miss. We really expected Team Canada to be better.
We predicted:
Canada, 9 points
USA, 6
Switzerland, 3
Norway, 0
The actual table:
USA, 9
Canada, 5
Switzerland, 3
Norway, 1
SWE - FIN
Worst game of the tournament, both for Team Finland and generally. Hopefully Finland can bounce back to next one.
We said: Finland will beat Sweden, and the Finnish press will start planning the parade route. Finland takes it 5-2.
The score: 3-0 Sweden. Miss.
Our predicted standings:
Finland, 9 points
Sweden, 6
Germany, 3
Belarus, 0
And the final outcome:
Sweden, 9 points
Finland, 6
Belarus, 3
Germany, 0
Our boys let us down, but otherwise the group went like we thought.
Our record for days five and six is one close and five misses. We aren't doing that good.
Our overall record stand at: 1-4-13; in winners and losers, 13-5.
**
Elimination games:
We thought they would be:
SWE-NOR, SWE
SVK-LAT, SVK
CZE-BLR, CZE
SUI-GER, SUI
Apart from Sweden going straight to quarterfinals and Canada not, we got the teams right, but not the seeding order. If somebody figured Canada would go to elimination games, more power to ya.
Actual elimination match-ups are:
CZE - LAT
CAN - GER
SVK - NOR
SUI - BLR
**
Our scenario is now in tatters; the final we and the rest of the hockey world predicted will not take place. So here's our revised scenario for the rest of the games!
Elimination games:
CZE - LAT
CAN - GER
SVK - NOR
SUI - BLR
We predict the team with home advantage will win each game, though Switzerland and Belarus might well take it to overtime. Obviously we're hoping Canada will stun the hockey world by getting eliminated here, but we aren't going to put any money on Germany. We won't be putting money on Canada either, with the odds our governmet betting agency is giving, offering 1.01 times your bet.
Quarterfinals, as per our prediction:
USA - SUI
SWE - SVK
RUS - CAN
FIN - CZE
USA will win their game against Switzerland, but the other ones are tough to call. Any one of the six teams can win their game.
Slovakia is a mystery to us: they lose to the Czechs but defeat Russia. Overall they haven't impressed us, but neither has Sweden. They have excellent goaltending, though: Halak and Lundqvist have been the top two goalies of the tournament so far. We think Slovakia is the worse team, and they take too much penalties. Slovakia's only chance is that the gold-laden Swedish team is not hungry enough. They looked lackluster even when beating Finland 3-0. Still, we predict Sweden will win.
The most anticipated match-up of the tournament will not take place in the finals, but in the quarterfinals. One of the two teams thought most likely to take gold will go home without a medal. We think both teams have played poorly so far. Russia looked alright in their opening game, stumbled against Slovakia, but recovered in their last game against the Czechs. Canada had trouble getting started against Norway, barely defeated Switzerland, and lost to USA. Russians seem to be improving their game, which Canada has so far failed to do. Having to play Germany won't help with that. Canada has the most pressure, and their game hasn't been very good. Unless they can make it all come together, they will lose. We predict Russia wins, hopefully by a goal by Ilya Kovalchuk.
Finland versus the Czech Republic is Finland's game to win or lose. If the team that played against Germany and Belarus shows up, Finland wins. If the joke of a team that lost to Sweden turns up, they would lose to Latvia, let alone the Czechs. We feel really bad about Finland after the last game, but we think they should be able to win this game. We predict Finland wins.
Semifinals:
USA - FIN
SWE - RUS
Much as we wish it were otherwise, we believe we'll see USA - Russia final with Sweden and Finland competing for the bronze. We think Finland will want the bronze more and win the game, and we stand by our original prediction that Russia will take gold.
Monday, February 22, 2010
SHE DRESSES WELL AND SHE PULLS OFF THE BOWL CUT.
Vika Gazinskayas. The Color of her dress is so bright. I feel happy just looking at it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)