Friday, February 10, 2012

Pistons vs. Heat Basketball Game


On January 25th, Brooke and I attended the Detroit Pistons vs. Miami Heat basketball game. The score at the end of the first half was 56-50, Miami. However, in the third quarter, each team scored the same amount of points, making the score at the end of the third, 80-74. In the fourth quarter, the Pistons scored more than the Heat, yet not enough to bring home the win. The final score was 101-98, Miami. Within the length of the game, we witnessed the talent of some of the top players in the NBA, as well as the newest recruit for the Pistons, 20-year-old Brandon Knight. According to Huizinga in Homo Ludens, “Play begins, and then at a certain moment it is ‘over’” (9). In just four twelve-minute quarters, we witnessed countless plays, turnovers, rebounds, and even dunks. However, as the buzzer sounded at the end of the fourth quarter, the game ended as quickly as it started. Although people spent hours talking about the game before it began and after it was over, the actual play only occurred from the moment it started to the moment it ended. In addition to the fact that the game was set for a pre-determined time, the game was also in a distinct setting—The Palace of Auburn Hills. As we discussed in class, having a distinct setting is another feature of game play.


Going into the game, the Pistons had lost twelve of their last fourteen games. Despite this rough patch, they always had each other to depend on in order to maintain their positive attitude. Compared to the Heat, who made it to the championship in 2011 and are ranked first in the Southeast Conference, the Pistons are one of the weakest teams in the NBA. For this reason, the Pistons did not have much to lose if they did not win. Thus, when the game started, the competition level was very low. The Pistons would not be as upset losing to the Heat as they would be losing to a team such as the Cleveland Cavilers, who are only ranked one spot ahead of them in the Central Conference. According to the article, Ranks and Rivals: A Theory of Competition by Stephen Garcia, competition is at its greatest level when you compare two counterparts of similar capability. Since the two teams had such different rankings, there was not much competition when the game began. However, as the game went on, in the fourth quarter the score became very close. This generated more competition because the Piston’s chance of winning was now within reach. In the end, the Heat did win by three points. However, Garcia would assert that the Pistons would have accepted the loss much more easily if they had lost by a greater amount of points. This disappointment is a result of the Social Comparison Theory.
NBA Basketball is very competitive because it is both a popular form of entertainment for the public and also a form of income for the players. Huizinga states:
“Play is superfluous. The need for it is only urgent to the extent that the enjoyment of it makes it a need. Play can be deferred or suspended at any time… It is never a task. It is done at leisure, during ‘free time’” (13).
We do not believe that professional basketball meets these terms for what is considered to be play. A NBA game cannot be suspended at any time because the schedules have been set months in advance. Further, playing basketball for the NBA is a career for the players. This makes it a form of a task, rather than a recreational activity done during their “free time”. This is not to say that the players do not enjoy playing the sport, as most have dreamed of playing professional basketball since they were just toddlers. However, professional basketball includes more than just a recreational aspect, as it is also the way in which the players earn their salary. Thus, as an official career, the players must obey the rules of their contract. With this being said, the game of basketball is not completely leisure because there are certain regulations that both the players and coaches must follow. Basketball as a form of play goes beyond pure recreation. It is recreation for us as fans but not necessarily for the players, coaches and other team members. They are judged based upon their performance and must uphold a positive image.
Basketball is a team sport. Therefore, even after the buzzer sounds to officially terminate the game, the players must continue to work together. They are a team even after they leave the court. Although the game is over, their commitment to each other is not. Their relationships must carry on from one game to the next. Huizinga in Homo Ludens writes, "A play-community generally tends to become permanent even after the game is over" (12). Both the Pistons and Heat players remain “apart together”, a term coined by Huizinga. The players on each team are teammates for the entire season, both on and off the court. They are distinct from other teams and the rest of the world because they have a special membership in their team. In a way, they are like a family. Simply because of their mutual commitment to the team, they have an everlasting commitment to each other.



Works Cited


Thursday, February 2, 2012

StarPower

The class on February 1st had us examine how we could change the game StarPower, a game with social tiers that idealizes the class differentiation in today's society. Although we didn't play it, we read descriptions of the game and what usually happens. With the squares being the highest tier and being able to the make the rules, they start to create rules that create a greater wealth disparity between them vs. the circles and triangles.

While I see this application in the real world since money and power are such a real-world thing and people are almost hypnotized by it, it's hard to see how in a class setting it would happen. The stakes are just so much lower that I don't see any incentive to put my other peers down. This is one of the issues I struggled with as I tried to put myself as a participant in the game. But it's hard to say since we actually didn't play the game. Furthermore, since the Occupy Wall Street movement, social inequality has been at the forefront of political and social discussions. If I were to play, I would feel sympathetic towards the lower tiers (if I was a square) and make it a point to not bully them around with rules and sanctions.

We were given the assignment of thinking about the flaws of StarPower and how our guild could go about fixing it. We thought a major flaw was that there had to be three tiers, and it becomes very difficult for people at lower tiers to move up. We came up with a few changes that could possibly be made to improve the game for the better.

1. Squares have to take at least one suggestion from the other groups

2. Opportunity to succeed should be reduced once you are at a higher level
3. People from bottom group randomly get upward mobility, not competing with within the groups
4. People from top offer up the ability to raise someone up, but it's randomly selected so there are no favorites
5. If squares refuse/are unable to raise person up, they are punished
6. If squares can raise enough people up, there is another level (diamond perhaps) where squares strive to be

I think about that 4th tier as the "Warren Buffett" tier. People would strive to help others out and be rewarded with a higher level. Obviously our rules aren't comprehensive and there would need to be more clarification. But that's what we came up with during our discussion. It would be very interesting to play StarPower with some of the suggestions others came up with.