Results 69 to 85 of 89
03-23-2007, 12:00 AM #69
Glad to know the weather in NZ is fine (figuratively). It's okay at my end...we are all badminton fans, aren't we???
Do have a good weekend!!!
03-23-2007, 12:03 AM #70Originally Posted by phaarix
Everybody knows their heroes can lose from time to time. We are all just zealous about our heroes. If they do lose, so be it.
I am happy to say I am one of those who barrack for my heroes and write good things about them here but sometimes (or most times now with LCW )they lose.
It is all in good fun (and humour) ....don't take anything seriously please.
03-23-2007, 12:16 AM #71Originally Posted by sabathiel
03-23-2007, 12:20 AM #72
Some things can and should be backed by evidence.
Some things cannot.
If I wake up tomorrow, and everyone else calls a fish a cow and a cow a fish, I cannot say they are wrong. I just have to change to suit everyone else. All the dictionaries must change, too. What are dictionaries compared to people?
If I wake up tomorrow, and people think mass murder is a good thing, then Hitler becomes a hero. What can I do? Opinions matter. That's why the mass media is such a powerful propaganda tool.
If I wake up tomorrow, and people think All-England is full of crap and it's the German Open that is the real deal, then the German Open is the real deal.
Solid facts are important, but people's opinion matter also. Why would people still talk about Cryuff's Holland when it never won a single World Cup?
03-23-2007, 12:25 AM #73Originally Posted by sabathiel
03-23-2007, 12:28 AM #74Originally Posted by phaarix
If I say that I strongly believe the earth is flat and provide no compelling evidence or reasons as to why I believe it to be so and say I am going to stick by it despite compelling reasons and evidence to the contrary then what does that say about my belief?
It is easy to believe one thing but to elaborate and provide compelling reasons to back up your belief is another thing. It would benefit us all if people back up their opinions with compelling reasons/arguments. If one provides reasons and arguments and others shred it to pieces with better reasons and arguments it is best to conceed the point is lost to maintain one's credibility so one can be taken seriously on other matters if one has good arguments.
03-23-2007, 12:31 AM #75Originally Posted by hcyong
03-23-2007, 12:38 AM #76Originally Posted by hcyong
Christopher Columbus proved that the earth is round when EVERYONE else say it's flat. Now every sane person thinks the earth is round.
Galileo believes the earth to revolve around the sun when everyone else believes the sun revolves around the earth. The Roman Catholic Church forced Galileo to retract his statement that he is wrong and he did retract with the qualification "but I am right". Today we all believe and know that earth orbits around the sun because of the arguments and evidence provided by Galileo. One person can change the whole world's belief. History has proven that to be the case.
03-23-2007, 01:06 AM #77Originally Posted by Joyous
So what if Sabathiel backs up his opinions with research ?(I want to say I do welcome good research) That does not mean his opinion is better though it may come across as more credible. Facts only tell part of the story and depends on how you interpret it. Logically a 64-entry looks tougher than a 32-entry (because of more matches) but actually the 32 is tougher because just about every match is tough .(compared to 64 where one or two matches allow a breather) Federer himself , after losing a Masters Series match,commented, 'You don't know how tough the Masters is. There are no easy matches and no rest days.' Grand Slams favour the experienced; Masters test the tough.9The SS is equivalent to the Masters)
That's why Super Dan is finding the going tough this year. He could not complete a 3T(3 tournaments) like he could in the past when each T was a 64 compared to 32 now. He got Super Done earlier than I expected. That will teach him a lesson; my guess now is he played in GO07 maybe to thwart WCH from racking up much needed ranking points.(But I wouldn't worry if WCH can't make it for WBC07. Roslin is a better bet against LD)
phaarix post 722 is splendid even though there are no facts or figures.
However, if I have a major decision to make and I need a counter check, I'll ask phaarix instead of sabathiel because phaarix has a better hunch. In fact,if you ask enterpreneurs or wise leaders, they will tell you their major decisions are made less on limited or incomplete data and a lot on hunches based on experience.
As for 'experts', some are better than others but it's dangerous to be beholden to them. The British physicist, Stephen Hawking challenged his professor, considered the authority of his field. Today he is regarded for his most important discoveries about gravity since Albert Einstein's modern theory of gravity about general relativity. Experts can go wrong and do go wrong and we have to question them to make progress. For example, I still consider AE as the 'prestigious' tournament with the Pitiful Purse but almost everyone else will disagree......
Sabathiel, let me say I appreciate the grounding in your posts although I don't agree with your viewpoints most of the time. I don't like to see phaarix cornered cos he's a wise guy and Joyous's comments may make your head big so I hope my input can help shrink it back to the good size.
Personally I usually cannot include figures in my posts cos I don't have 2cents datamining skills but I do scan data to arrive at 'facts'. Truth is..I don't think I even pass the keyboarding speed set by the moderators!
03-23-2007, 01:37 AM #78
Hmm, i have a funny feeling...
...this thread is gonna go into over time period......if not locked, soon(hope not)...
03-23-2007, 01:57 AM #79
No right or wrong opinionsOriginally Posted by sabathiel
03-23-2007, 02:25 AM #80Originally Posted by pjswift
Intelligent discussions/debate must be backed up with compelling arguments, facts or evidence if necessary. Hunches are fine but the person making the hunch must state to the audience that they are making a hunch and not disguise the hunch as obvious truth or credible opinion. There is nothing more dubious than pseudo truths based simply on a feeling. Furthermore how can someone's hunch be better than someone else's unless that hunch has been PROVEN to be correct by the obvious results. I am sorry to say that Phaarix hunch has not been proven to be correct and hence it is not better than my opinion which is based on facts, results, some evidence and compelling arguments. I have an open mind but I need people to point out with good reasons where my arguments fall with similar methods of good and intelligent debate. Until my opinions are proven to be wrong I would not change my mind.
You talk about entrepreneurs and wise leaders who base some of their decisions based on a hunch but the numbers of these decisions based on a hunch is far less than the ones based on data and evidence. Most people and most decisions are based on rationality and data. Only gamblers make decisions on hunches and they are rare in the real world. These people are not the norm but rather the exception and many of them are wrong on their hunches. If they are right in their hunches they deserve to be in history as the greats such as Columbus who had a hunch that the earth is round and manage to prove it to be in history.
I am sorry to say that Phaarix has not manage to provide any proof that he is in that league of people from what I have read on this forum. Who knows he is only young, 18 according to his profile (I am 38 by the way!) and he could be a potential great person in the future but unless he can provide us with proof that his hunches are correct we are stuck with treating him as an average person who simply has hunches and cannot prove them to be right and is wrong in the absence of any proof. I don't know about you but I can't see Phaarix being in the league of wise leaders being only 18 and as he confessed inarticulate. You say that Phaarix has a better hunch but on what basis do you judge his hunch to be better. Is it your hunch that he has a better hunch? I don't make hunches on this forum because what I am doing is providing a detailed and reasoned argument to back up by opinions. You talk about hunches made based on experience. What experience has an 18 year old has to offer relative to a 38 year old that makes his hunches superior to my reasoned arguments?
Lin Dan is doing well in the SS this year with the exception of one tournament where he had an early departure. The SS is not equal to the Masters becaue the Masters only allows for the best to compete while many in the SS are not considered anywhere near the best in the game.
Stephen Hawking has proven himself to be the greats of history and hence his judgement by challenging his professor is justified as a someone great in the making challenging a historical nobody (his professor, what's his name? Exactly nobody knows this guy!). Off course an expert can be wrong that is why there are so many experts but in the absence of proof that an expert is wrong and most if not all other experts agree with his opinions than we are stuck with what we call conventional wisdom. Fine, they all could be wrong but prove it that they are wrong. Columbus and Galileo proved it. So in my case I could be wrong too but all I ask is a detailed and reasoned arguments to prove that I am wrong. Once proven that I am wrong I will humbly admit that I am wrong but in the absence of superior arguments and proof that I am wrong I am free to hold my opinion and think that I am right. I have very compelling reasons to think so.
Lastly you are not the only one who thinks that the All England is the most prestigious (maybe equal with the Olympics and WC) tournament. Many would agree with you. I think so. Phaarix also thought about it. I have read some comments from other people on this forum who thinks so too. Taufik wants to win it badly and so does Zhang Ning. So it is not true as you say almost everyone else would disagree.
Last edited by sabathiel; 03-23-2007 at 02:30 AM.
03-23-2007, 03:03 AM #81Originally Posted by pjswift
03-23-2007, 05:25 AM #82
Hey Sabathiel, you need to go out more!!You've been surrounded by 4 walls far too long!
03-23-2007, 08:35 AM #83Originally Posted by ctjcad
I'm glad you can see what I was trying to say pjswift.
Thanks for pointing out sabathiel that YES I am only 18 . So it's true that what I believe now may change as I grow older and get more life experience or whatever. But I myself haven't been convinced otherwise, so for now I'm sticking by my stubborn young mind's argument .
I don't believe I am very good at getting a point across, I'll admit that again. But it doesn't necessarily make my point wrong.
Last edited by phaarix; 03-23-2007 at 08:50 AM.
03-23-2007, 01:27 PM #84Originally Posted by sabathiel
Talking about lawyers. I once met a lawyer who, in a moment of frankness, told me this: 'There's only a fine line between a crook and a lawyer.A crook is one who dare to break the law; a lawyer, well, one who dare not (yet).'
Don't underestimate 18 years olds. I've met not a few who are refreshingly intelligent, self assured, well travelled with uncanny wisdom. Their only problem is they look and sound young, so they are perceived as less credible. 38 years olds are having it tough because they are the sandwich generation, caught between having to mind the kids (if any) and the parents (if any). While capable of greater wisdom than 18years olds, may not have the energy to exercise it. But I can assure you phaarix has an above average IQ (no need to administer IQ test) because he can follow your posts (which are high class by BCF standards) and has the temerity to challenge you.It also means, of course, that i have an IQ of more than 100 as well and so are all the rest of BCF members.
sabathiel, I want to say I do enjoy your posts because you put a lot of thought into them and they have substance. You have every right to hold on to your opinion and not change them.Pls remember BCF is not a courtroom so proving who is right or wrong is not a prerequisite to participation. If you don't like some posts, just apply censorship; no one is forcing you to read them. Especially from pesky 18 years olds. Have a feeling they are going to post more (as a sign of protest)
03-23-2007, 02:24 PM #85Originally Posted by phaarix
By jbchiong in forum German Open / All England / Swiss Open 2007Replies: 0: 03-12-2007, 10:54 PM
By yannie in forum Malaysia Open / Korea Open 2007Replies: 0: 01-25-2007, 02:48 PM
By Shabok in forum German Open / All England / Swiss Open 2005Replies: 38: 01-10-2006, 06:07 AM
By kwun in forum Swiss Open 2006 / German Open 2006Replies: 4: 01-04-2006, 06:24 PM
By kwun in forum Swiss Open 2004Replies: 0: 02-25-2004, 03:11 PM