Jacob,
I was accused of being a theoretician and that is a silly accusation so I
countered that accusation with the fact that I've developed my expertise
on
the field, not at my keyboard.
My ideas have been tested by a player and in situations outside my mind.
I'm the player. This is not theory. You can't strip me of my knowledge
that has been gained in situations on the playing field.
Lastly, I am an expert. That I'm not established as such I couldn't care
less about. That's for history to judge I suppose.
"jacob" <jacobsider@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:6e3ae282-de99-4e91-9b59-f53abe715cd4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Frank: I've played ultimate nearly 4500 times (give or take). I guess
> that's practical enough for you?"
>
> No, Frank. You said you were an expert at ultimate. When challenged
> on this, your responses fell into one of the following categories:
> 1) Those who today challenge your expertise will one day see the folly
> of their ways.
> 2) You have played lots of ultimate.
> 3) The top players in today's game, despite being good athletes, are
> not sophisticated strategically.
> 4) Certain common criteria for ultimate expertise which happen to not
> apply to you, such as winning or writing a book, are not really
> accurate measures.
> 5) You have a lot of very good, sophisticated ideas for ultimate.
>
> Even if all of these things are true, they do not establish that you
> are an expert in ultimate. In order to be an expert, your ideas and
> knowledge must actually be tested by players and situations which
> exist outside of your mind.
|
