I have written about the phenomenon of Schadenfreude before. As a German major, the concept always had a special appeal, also because of how its sounds and FEELS (during the speaking of it) in the mouth. As is true for so many concepts, they lose a little bit in translation. But joy at another’s misfortune is a pretty good translation in this case.
In general, I am not a fan of Schadenfreude because I don’t think it takes us in the direction of our better selves. I think it tends to reinforce relative pettiness. While pettiness is probably constitutionally protected ‘speech,’ I don’t think it helps us individually or collectively.
That doesn’t mean that I am immune. Far from it. It isn’t something I experience that often, which I appreciate (as I don’t think it is really to my credit).
More below.
Top Comments recognizes the previous day's Top Mojo and strives to promote each day's outstanding comments through nominations made by Kossacks like you. Please send comments (before 9:30pm ET) by email to topcomments@gmail.com or by our KosMail message board.
I was thinking about it tonight because of this year’s NCAA Basketball tournament. On Friday, the Number ONE seeded team in the entire tournament became the first one seed to EVER lose to a Number 16 seed in the history of collegiate basketball.
Diary Update (3/20/18):
Cali Scribe pointed out to me in the comment threads that my information is incorrect. In fact, 20 years ago, Harvard’s Women’s team upset Stanford. My deepest apologies for the incorrect information. Thank you, Cali Scribe.
To clarify a couple of things to those who aren’t fans of ‘sportsing,’ the tournament is made up of four regionals, with teams assigned rankings within those regionals based on their year’s performance, using somewhat convoluted and not wholly objective criteria. The lowest ranked team in a regional is a 16 seed, the highest ranked team in a regional is a 1 seed. So, there are four 16 seeds and four 1 seeds each year. The 1 seeds are further distinguished, with one of them being the highest ranked of all of the 1 seeds, then 2-3-4, respectively.
Until this year, of 135 games between 1 seeds and 16 seeds, 1 seeds won 135 times. That’s right, no 1 seed had EVER lost to a 16 seed.
The number one ranked team in the land before this year’s tournament was the University of Virginia, with a record of 31-2.
Friday, night one of this year’s tournament, Virginia lost to unheralded 16 seed, UMBC. But they didn’t just lose. They lost by 20 points, 74-54, in the biggest upset in collegiate basketball history.
Now, I did not go to an ACC school. I don’t have any feeling one way or another about UVA, no ax to grind, no issues of any kind. All season long I didn’t give them much thought, except when they beat my alma mater in December. But I bore no resentment about that, no wish to get even.
No, the only argument I had with them was their STYLE of play. Yes, I’d be the first to admit that style of play is probably ALSO constitutionally protected ‘speech.’ It exists, it has always existed. Every team has a preferred style of play, and it does not reflect negatively on ANY of them for that fact.
But, the style UVA plays isn’t one that I enjoy. It isn’t a style that I like or appreciate, no matter how exquisitely done. They play was is known as ‘slow-down’ basketball.
While I did not watch that game, in 1968 two ACC teams playing in the ACC tournament played a full game to a final score of 12-10. N.C. State beat Duke by that score. The halftime score was 4-2!
Perhaps that sounds intriguing in the abstract, but those players weren’t running up and down the court trying to kick the ball into a goal, protected by a goalie. By basketball standards, there simply was no action. Dull dull dull dull dull.
That game took place in an era before there was a shot clock, where each team has a certain number of seconds to take a shot. Shot clocks were implemented to accelerate the pace of a game, or at least try to insure that there was some semblance of pace.
But in the decades since the implementation of the shot clock, no team has enjoyed more success with slow down basketball than this year’s Virginia Cavaliers.
So, what is the problem, BeninSC?!
For me the problem is that it is just not interesting basketball. Walking the ball up the court, intentionally going super slow for strategic purposes. Speaking for myself, I would rather watch paint dry. I would rather watch people dragging their nails across chalk boards. Life is too short watching such an athletic sport played at such an abysmal pace.
For UVA, the problem is a different one. Slow play also keeps the score low. Until Friday, not a single team Virginia played this year scored as many as 70 points. One team managed 36 points against them, two other teams 37 points. So they have been very effective with it.
Yet, such extreme slow play also carries some risk, because an underrated team is still able to keep the score fairly close, because so little scoring happens. On Friday, UMBC became more confident as the game progressed, particularly when they got a lead! Conversely, faced with a deficit, the slow play masters were at a growing disadvantage, because they, for once, had to try to accelerate their own play, which they had worked all season to keep as slow as possible. Having to speed up took them out of THEIR comfort zone. They started making mistakes they never had time for, all season long, and UMBC took advantage, extending the lead that was already too big for a slow-down team to overcome.
So, in the greatest upset in college basketball history, a slow-down team, unable to adjust and adapt, lost hideously. And I’m glad.
No, I am not glad for the players who have to live with it. And I’m not glad for their fans. But even if a team chooses that style of play, hopefully they’ll recognize that they have to prepare to adapt, as well, as teams must do for them. All eggs in one basket makes for a lot of broken eggs.
On to tonight’s comments! Formatted and published by brillig!
TOP COMMENTS
Brillig's ObDisclaimer: The decision to publish each nomination lies with the evening's Diarist and/or Comment Formatter. My evenings at the helm, I try reeeeallllyy hard to publish everything without regard to content. I really do, even when I disagree personally with any given nomination. "TopCommentness" lies in the eyes of the nominator and of you, the reader - I leave the decision to you. I do not publish self-nominations (ie your own comments) and if I ruled the world, we'd all build community, supporting and uplifting instead of tearing our fellow Kossacks down. Please remember that comment inclusion in Top Comments does not constitute support or endorsement by diarist, formatter, Top Comments writers or DailyKos. Questions, complaints or comments? Contact brillig.
From watercarrier4diogenes:
This thread begun by ROGNM has a couple of gems in it. From Karen Wehrstein’s Trump is flipping out because Mueller sent him questions.
From brillig:
Railfan’s short, sweet response to diarist Jen Hayden’s closing words in Former congressman says he's had enough, publicly resigns from the Republican party over Trump
TOP MOJO
Top Mojo for yesterday, March 18th, 2018, first comments and tip jars excluded. Thank you mik for the mojo magic! For those of you interested in How Top Mojo Works, please see his diary on FAQing Top Mojo.
Top Pictures for yesterday, March 18th, 2018. Click any picture to be taken to the full comment or picture. Thank you jotter!