Freakonomics

Freakonomics by Steven D. Levitt interesting book for the guy who likes to generate “controversial” discussions at parties. So sumo wrestlers cheat, drug dealers live with their parents, and real estate agents receive a higher closing price when they sell a house that they own themselves. OK. Steven Levitt delivers his arguments in a light, easy to read, slightly esoteric format.

The economics are sound. Basically the pretence is that every individual is interested in maximising their utility. OK.

The most contentious chapter concerns Levitt’s belief that the decline of the crime rate in the late 1990s was caused by the legalisation of abortion in the 1970s. As a result of Roe v. Wade, indigent women who would have otherwise brought a hardened criminal into the world received abortions. However, I feel that the issue is far more complex and involves multiple factors.

It’s sort of like that TV show where the dude finds a briefcase containing details of his imminent death and attempts to change the future. Is changing his behaviour enough to cheat death or did he die because of the actions he took in light of this new information?

Levitt makes a very solid statement that incentives drive behaviour. I definitely agree; the world is comprised of choices and consequences. Levitt’s point is similar to Choice Theory: individuals choose to behave the way they do because this behaviour fills a need. People are responsible for their actions because they responded to an incentive and chose to maximise their utility.

(On that note, why don’t we teach more decision-making in schools?)

I believe that intrinsic motivation is much more powerful than extrinsic motivation. Coaches steer the ship but if the players believe personally in the ship’s direction, much less short-term coaching is required. According to Levitt and Choice Theory, coaches must create meaningful incentives to engineer the actions they desire. Every student-athlete is an individual and this is easier said than done.

Night Tennis

James Blake and Andre Agassi played one of the better tennis matches that I have seen in recent years last night (and part of this morning.) The majority of the points were very well played, displaying the tremendous skill of both players. The match was intense and legitimately surprising as the momentum changed sides several times.

If there is a lesson that can be applied in other sports, it is to never give up. Down two sets and a break in the third, Agassi brought his game to another level and won the next two sets. Needing to break to stay in the match, Agassi elevated his play again, hitting a number of brilliant returns. Anything can happen: the match was on Blake’s racquet twice (at 6-5 in the fifth set and at 5-4 in the tie-breaker) but he couldn't close Agassi out.

Another interesting aspect of the game was body language. In the fifth set, Agassi seemed more energetic, bouncing on the balls of his feet. Blake’s shoulders were slumped and he seemed to be engaging in some negative self-talk. Although the match was decided in a tie-breaker, I was very confident that Agassi would win because of his confident attitude.

Notre Dame Football and a Coach

Previously, I used to enjoy cheering for Notre Dame football. The Fighting Irish conveyed a sense of prestige when they took the field. I truly respected Tyrone Willingham and the work that he was doing. When Willingham was dumped at the same time as Notre Dame clung to a pretence of integrity, it was an affront to sensibility.

I understand that most “big-time” sports are for entertainment purposes only, especially the Association. Most teams and athletes follow the Al Davis mantra “just win baby,” and I’m cool with that. What bothered me was that Notre Dame said it was never about on-field performance when it obviously was all about winning. Since that day, I ceased all of my emotional involvement with that team.

Attending a Notre Dame home game in during Tyrone Willingham's initial eight game winning streak was a very enjoyable experience. Watching the Pitt-ND game on Saturday, it seems like the Fighting Irish have an exciting team that it would be fun to cheer for. Nevertheless, I have a 2002 “Return to Glory” shirt but it is staying in the box in the basement with the rest of my Notre Dame apparel.