Intelligence In Sports

[markusmod]

Is being coachable a sign of intelligence?

What if a player's aggroance makes him uncoachable, is aggroance then a sign of ******ity?

Aggroance is always considered a sign of 'willfully ******ity' - so then is willfull ******ity a sign of less intelligence?

Values can make one act against their own best interest . . . acting against one's own best interest is an act of willfull ******ity.

Values offten make one willfully ******, so then are only sociopaths actually intelligence?

I am not sure if we actually even have a true definition of what intelligence is.

Successful athletes tend to come across as brighter than the average bear but that may be nothing more then media experience.

A lot of athletes are sure ****** when it comes to money

[Willie Pep 229]

A lot of athletes are sure ****** when it comes to money

True - I wonder how much of it has to do with the people around them. Both the hangers-ons who push for them to be unnecessarily careless and the predators who rob them.

I remember when Tommy Hearns was frugal with his money the boxing rags labeled him cheap. It seemed a dirty trick to me.

The ones who blow it all they call ****** the ones who don't they call cheap.

[QueensburyRules]

True - I wonder how much of it has to do with the people around them. Both the hangers-ons who push for them to be unnecessarily careless and the predators who rob them.

I remember when Tommy Hearns was frugal with his money the boxing rags labeled him cheap. It seemed a dirty trick to me.

The ones who blow it all they call ****** the ones who don't they call cheap.

- - They called Poppy cheep when he used to stiff waitresses of their tips.

Now that Oscar has made him a millionaire, don't know if he still does that.

[Willie Pep 229]

- - They called Poppy cheep when he used to stiff waitresses of their tips.

Now that Oscar has made him a millionaire, don't know if he still does that.

That is cheap. But going to a tity bar and making it 'rain' is ******.

[DeeMoney]

True - I wonder how much of it has to do with the people around them. Both the hangers-ons who push for them to be unnecessarily careless and the predators who rob them.

I remember when Tommy Hearns was frugal with his money the boxing rags labeled him cheap. It seemed a dirty trick to me.

The ones who blow it all they call ****** the ones who don't they call cheap.

I think most pro athletes are actually pretty good with their money (especially now where many pro leagues have rookie induction seminars), like most things the media just likes to show the 3% that make an interesting story. In this case, those that blew all their money.

I will say the predator aspect is real though. I imagine a lot more people, athlete or not, would be tricked out of their money if they had enough to make it worth while of some financial leach. We just don't hear about it because nobody is wasting their time on an average Joe's 50K a year.

[QueensburyRules]

That is cheap. But going to a tity bar and making it 'rain' is ******.

- - Dunno since I don't frequent tltty joints. I like my women down home and wholesome Charley Pride style.

Kiss an angel good morning
And love her like the devil when you get back home.

Still POed over he, Marv, Hank, and Colin getting the jab like the govt instructed them, and then stone dead within 24 hrs with nary a peep even out of the Black Press.

[The Old LefHook]

Is being coachable a sign of intelligence?

What if a player's aggroance makes him uncoachable, is aggroance then a sign of ******ity?

Aggroance is always considered a sign of 'willfully ******ity' - so then is willfull ******ity a sign of less intelligence?

Values can make one act against their own best interest . . . acting against one's own best interest is an act of willfull ******ity.

Values offten make one willfully ******, so then are only sociopaths actually intelligence?

I am not sure if we actually even have a true definition of what intelligence is.

Successful athletes tend to come across as brighter than the average bear but that may be nothing more then media experience.

The ability to do math makes a person IQ smart. The inability to do math makes a person dumb. Period. There is no more to it than that. Smart people can do math and dumb people can't. Only people who can do math are going to score high on IQ tests, even when there are no math questions on the test.

No, stubborn is not ******. Can't learn math is ******. Verbal fluency and vocabulary are but common ways to seem smart when you are not.

Successful people do not have to be smart. Work ethic, personality and sociability all play into sports success. Intelligent people have to be able to learn math if they do make the attempt, whether they currently know any math or not. How will that show itself in boxing? Now that is a good question. The smart fighter does not do math in his corner, yet his thought processes would likely separate him from dummies. You actually cannot tell who is smart simply by watching them fight. When people talk about smart fighters they mean cunning fighters or crafty fighters or careful fighters, but certainly not fighters who are good at math, or could be. Yet that is the only actual criterion for ANYONE being smart.

All right, you haters, get busy.

[The Old LefHook]

The thing is, fighting smart probably has not a thing in the world to do with being smart. You could be dumb, and still fight smart. No problem there to see.

One might get closer to truth by proclaiming: "Mayweather is smart, because he has a ton of money and is not broke yet."

Now of course Mayweather does not even manage his own fortune. Having someone smart manage your fortune is not a dumb thing, though, is it?

I don't know if Mayweather could do math or not, if he tried to. Fear of losing and being a sap has kept him somewhat wise. His own daddy once predicted that he would wind up walking the streets of Grand Rapids mumbling to himself. This image may still haunt him and keep him wise.

So far we have ignored the sibling of math--geometry. Abilities of spatial perception have to play a significant role in successful boxing, whether a fighter is crowding his opponent or counter punching. Every aspect of boxing is an aspect of manipulating space. We cannot say that Mayweather or Pep or Clay were mediocre at controlling space. We would be better off saying they were geniuses at this aspect of the sport.

[markusmod]

True - I wonder how much of it has to do with the people around them. Both the hangers-ons who push for them to be unnecessarily careless and the predators who rob them.

I remember when Tommy Hearns was frugal with his money the boxing rags labeled him cheap. It seemed a dirty trick to me.

The ones who blow it all they call ****** the ones who don't they call cheap.

Some of them want to copy others. These days everyone wants to be like Mayweather with a dozen cars, houses, etc.

[GhostofDempsey]

Boxing requires a high level of concentration and the ability to read your opponent and develop instincts necessary to adapt. Intelligence is a tricky term. The Klitschko brothers are highly educated and were very successful boxers. By contrast, Mayweather is uneducated and borderline illiterate yet the most successful boxer in history. He had a high degree of intelligence in the ring, but not so much outside of the ring. Algieri has a Master's Degree, but proved to be a mediocre boxer. I think a lot of fighters have better instincts and survival skills than other athletes. Particularly defensive fighters, they tend to me more cerebral and methodical.

Football is a very strategic game and a QB needs to be able to read defenses, make adjustments on the fly, and remember plays. Are they exceptionally intelligent? Meh, Terry Bradshaw will never have a seat at the MENSA table, but he led the Steelers to 4 Super Bowl wins. I'd say coaching football probably takes the highest degree of intelligence of the major league sports.