There are tons of things that other people who are "dumb" just know way more about than me.
The Best American Sports Writing of the Century
For instance you can tell by my posts I suck at writing. Everyone is interested in something and that is where most people's knowledge lies. Some people are interested on what celebrity's ex is doing what. They aren't really "stupid".
- Yours Truly, Lucy B. Parker: Take My Advice: Book 4.
- La vocazione civile del giurista: Saggi dedicati a Stefano Rodotà (Percorsi Laterza) (Italian Edition).
- Intelligent people have 'unnatural' preferences and values that are novel in human evolution.
- Navigation menu!
They just spent their time reading about gossip. I think space is awesome. I read about it a lot. We both did the same thing but because the topic I was interested in is considered "smart" so am I. And people I said it earlier but i'll say it again. They are all what you make of them. You may have a preference but it is just that. Well lets consider this. On a previous post, it was stated doctors engineers scientists etc.
Confucius, Diagoras bc approx , so not new. Most studied very hard for what they know and will never be exceptional as those listed. But there are those that stand out very notably from the crowd and all of them had one thing in common besides their brains. They all went against normal beliefs and gained notoriety in what they did.
Frink Socialism and liberalism are almost exact opposites anarchy would be the exact opposite. This is not up for discussion, this is the very definition of the two ideologies. While the socialist wants a totalitarian government that governs all organs of society the liberal wants the government to be almost nonexistent and to only cover law enforcement, judicial system and national defenses and according to the liberal everything else should be controlled by market demands in a completely capitalistic system.
You're probably confusing liberalism with libertarianism or social liberalism. These are compromised forms of liberalism and are absolutely not to be counted as liberalism, because they fatally try to mix planned economy with market economy -- causing private entities to undermine governmental entities and vice versa -- back and forth, until the model breaks and one of the markets is finally dominant.
Only leftist can say NO Style of Government is the best. Therefore we cant say Hitlers government was bad, Stalins government was bad, Maos government was bad. Who cares if their government killed hundreds of millions. Stop feeding the troll. What a load of crap! This "study" stinks of "research" that is insultingly biased and based on an insecure personal agenda. Take a breather everybody. These statistics show the case for the average person. If you are conservative and religious but are cruising physorg, you are probably smarter than the average person.
This is not an attack on any one individual. Wow, a whole six points difference. What's the margin of error on IQ tests again? More than six points? Well, I'll be damned. They are specific examples of governments that are indeed a specific type of government. Coming up with an example of a government of a certain type which did bad things does not make the type as a whole bad. Its not like the U.
Immoral people can get into positions of power and do immoral things. Even a pure democracy could vote to slaughter some children for fun. So here it is again "They are all what you make of them. But it doesn't really matter what government was in place before it failed. I don't imagine I will want to be in the US when it collapses under its evergrowing debt and trade deficit.
Thanks JayK, that vid was great. After reading most of the comments I've come to the conclusion that humans in general have a low IQ with a few outliers that make up an exception to the rule. Interesting how you say this individual has no statistical references, proof, or foundation, yet you show no statistical references, proof, or foundation to show he is wrong and to make your case stronger. I was raised in a Christian, conservative home, yet throughout middle school and high school I participated in accelerated programs and gained college credits before entering any University.
If only I'd known. PhD in Cell and Molecular Biology. Uh, you're not gonna go into a staff meeting and shoot up a bunch of people are ya, 'cause I'd wanna call somebody then. Uh yeah, thats exactly what I planned on doing. Where did such a stupid comment come from? And since I am also very freaking smart but also flawed like you , and thus can anticipate your answer, my only comment would be that many people have far more brains than they can handle, that is know how to use effectively, despite their innate terror of the future and their own inevitable decline and conclusion.
Just because I believe in God means I need to grow up? I don't insult you for your beliefs or lack thereof. Whether or not God exists is not a question for me to answer-each individual must answer that. To me he does, do you he doesn't. The point of my comment was not to "spread my faith," but rather to show that even "Christian conservatives" can have high IQs and be just as intelligent as liberal atheists. Religion and political beliefs have nothing to do with it.
Lets get back to the science-could genetics play an important role? Data suggests Amy Bishop, PhD, who murdered three professors and killed her brother, was a socialist. My apologies for the ignorance. All I can say is, good thing I'm not a socialist, whew!
I think the matter involves more of thinking of what Economists call "externalities," the HIDDEN cost of something "lurking variables" by a Statistician's verbiage. Also, IQ cannot measure all types of intelligences it is based on culture, religion, sex, creed, etc. IQ tries to quantify the unquantifiable; there will be lurking variables. Perhaps science and technology hasn't caught up to God's knowledge: First let me say that its almost impossible for one group of people to be exactly equal to another group of people in anything.
One is going to be larger than the other. In this article, we aren't given much information on what the samples were or how they were taken, if there was I didn't see it. Given that, an IQ test doesn't do a very good job of measuring all forms of intelligence, the can be easily seen in most of our greatest minds in history. Very few were without significant quirks.
Each person has a fairly limited amount of neurons in their brain and limited time to reinforce their connections. Just because they don't devote their intelligence to something that would show up on an IQ test does not make them less intelligent. I score just below average on IQ tests, but score tremendously high on "visual IQ". So a person watching me do a 3d puzzle may think I have a high IQ simply because I have a high ability to visualize 3d space.
My views on God: On an infinite timeline I can only see two probably outcomes for humanity. We become extinct by a large astroid, our sun going super nova, or the collapse of the universe, it doesn't matter at which point if there is no god all our beliefs and decisions and morals will have had little if any influence on the universe and will eventually be completely forgotten. We somehow manage to escape all catastrophes and continue to evolve over billions of billions of years to into beings that have near absolute knowledge and control of ourselves and our surroundings and thereby becoming god-like.
Were this to happen it would indicate a fairly high probability of another being doing the same thing. Morals are pointless or the existence of a "god" is probable. Regardless I hope for the latter. Embriette, The point of my comment was not to "spread my faith," but rather to show that even "Christian conservatives" can have high IQs and be just as intelligent as liberal atheists. So you're studying for a PhD? I hope somewhere along the line your department forces you to take basic statistics, whereupon you will learn the distinction between individual sample vs.
The study under discussion talked about average scores. Nowhere in the article did they claim that all samples within either population religious or atheist had identical values.
According to that study, in statistical parlance, you're an outlier. Some flaws in your analysis: To you as an individual, and even to your offspring, it doesn't matter what happens on an infinite timeline. To your actual life in the here and now, morals are very much important, because they help keep you alive and well amid a society of other humans. Any infinite-timeline projections from such ignorance would be premature and pointless.
Just pointing out, as well; a highly-developed, ridiculously intelligent, near-omnipotent being could end up being benign, but it could also end up being, basically, Cthulhu. I don't argue that that would happen, mind, I'm just pointing out that your thought experiment has alternate, and far less pleasant, interpretations. Putting IQ in terms of a computer, what does it measure? Mostly algorithms, and to some extent processing speed. IQ measures pattern recognition, logical thinking, cognitive inertia, and creativity. IQ does not measure: It can be argued that the things IQ does measure, play important roles in virtually any facet of human activity.
But IQ is not by any means a complete assessment of a person's cognitive repertoire. I am a nonreligious liberal, But I would be the last person to gloat over an ultrareligious congress about the Logistics of Noahs Ark, while interrupting their keynote speaker with an annoying "told you so". Instead I fight my uncontrollable liberal urge to apply our open-source Very Loose Interpretation wich, by looking at melting icecubes in a glass of whisky and depending on rate of ingestion, not only finds evidence for global warming and global cooling but also allows to grossly extrapolate any study findings well beyond the scope of: Who would have thought that??
Pink Elephant As a matter of fact, my program is "forcing" me to take a statistics course, and I have taken a statistic course in my undergrad. First of all, I never said I was anything other than an outlier. I never said I wasn't-but I also never said that Christians, in general, were more intelligent than non-Christians. I was just using myself as an example of the "other side"-simply because many people reading this article seem to take it out of context and use it as an absolute to justify their religious or political beliefs. Second of all, if you want to talk statistics and the statistical basis of this article, can you tell me if the sample size was large enough and varied enough to be applied to the general population in any dependable way?
How many people were sampled? Of what race were they? What parts of the world were they from? What types of societies were they from? Unless you sample peoples of every kind, nation, and background, the statistics mean nothing. Sounds more like the title of a blog than a scientific study. If true, you are the first I have heard to admit to this. I guess I'm speaking more of people who do research.
Why would they continue to do research if they know it all? At the same time, I'm reminded of Dr. Phil Jones and computer models you can feed junk data into and get hockey sticks So every entity is religious. Embriette, First of all, I never said I was anything other than an outlier. Your tone, if not your exact words, suggested you were using yourself as an example to dispute the findings -- as if that were a valid argument.
Unless you sample peoples of every kind, nation, and background, the statistics mean nothing You forgot every planet, and every galaxy. Which, after a simple web search, yields the following information: I don't understand this article, What about me? I have an IQ of and I recognize the possible existence of God. I wish to add to the article; -the tendency to recognize the extra-phenomenal concept of God depends on cultural influence. You are a prime example that IQ doesn't equal to "smart". This is a study. It computes averages and variances i. You cannot use statistics to firmly predict what should happen in a singular case.
One case that does not conform to the averages does not invalidate a study I guess this is what the anti-global warming guys don't understand when they say "but outside my door it was cold this morning - so global warming must be a hoax". Marjon "How do you make a socialist government system moral? It is systemically immoral. If the government is responsible for healthcare, everyone gets it. So remind me again how it is immoral for everyone to have access to the same service, protection, and status?
I just don't see it. And If you bring up another communist dictator that did his job poorly that is not proof that socialism is immoral. Sweden is a democracy but it has socialized health care. Everyone in that country has it. Sounds fair to me. Go ahead complpain about how the healthcare would suck. Still everyone is treated equally therefore morally. Get this, I have private health insurance here in the states. I made an appointment with my doctor for Monday. I made this appointment Wednesday. In Sweden you are required to be seen by a primary care physician in 3 days. My appointment would be Saturday.
Marjon "Socialist governments have the philosophy that the government grants rights to its victims. The only opportunity they have to 'make of them' is to try and survive. I don't get what you are saying. Certain hypothesis; such as: For example; Galileo's free-fall experiment is not statistical, it use one special case to invalidate all Aristorelian statistical perceptions. If someone lives in cultural environment where religious dogma is used to rationalize irrational behaviour, then no wonder people disbelieve god.
The author must also check places where religious moral is in synchronicity with rational behaviour. I believe in global-warming, you're commiting a logical fallacy by associating me with other fallacious logics. I was just pointing out that you were making the same mistake as the anti-global-warming-crowd, not that you were one of them. Statistics are not ironhard predictions for every case. Outliers are possible and not all distributions are normal ones. All you could do is perform a census and show that your results deviate from the one presented AND that your census has a greater statistical power or show some bias was present in the original study that isn't in yours.
I'm constrained to agree with antialias on one point: On the other hand, antialias: Though I do agree that the IQ of a person has surprising little to do with their intelligence. My concern with this study is the margin of error. Depending on their sample size, that could be well within the error. Also, what backgrounds are people coming from? Oh I'm not saying that IQ isn't somehow related to intelligence. It just doesn't mean that high IQ people will always make logical statements or understand what they talk about on any given subject.
There are plenty of intelligent people who just don't know what statistics are, what they can tell you and what they cannot tell you. It all comes down how you do the tests and sometimes even to what cultural background you administer the test. Pink Elephant You said my tone implied that I was using myself as an example. Isn't that exactly what I went on to say I was doing? Thanks for pointing that out for me again. You seem to keep missing the fact that I wasn't using myself as proof that the article is wrong, just as an example of the 'other side.
As for your link to the statistics, remind me again why I was looking at that? All I found was info on adolescent whites and blacks in America. Certainly not a representation of the whole world. And it would be hard to sample beings from other galaxies, when we don't even know if they exist, and even if they did, we haven't figured out how to communicate with them yet. Wasn't this a study of humans anyway? Maybe we should have God take an IQ test, and see how He comes out? Maybe, just maybe, the more intelligent people are liberal because more intelligent people go to college, and colleges are overwhelmingly liberal.
Even if you're conservative it's difficult to get out of school without being converted. Even in highschool it becomes obvious that the teachers are almost all liberal and the pressure on a student to identify with the teachers is enormous. I say this as an athiest with liberal values on equality and human rights but who hates the "liberal party" because it's full of loud mouthed individuals that try to shove thier ideals down your throat The bloggers are entirely correct. AGW has become a religion. Marjon "The US Constitution is designed to provide equal treatment under the law and equal opportunity.
It is unconstitutional that they are treated differently, yet the vast majority of states do so. This flaw does not make democracy inherently bad. Will the state force people to become doctors? Sweden is a democracy with socialized medicine.
If there were not enough doctors they would HIRE more. Lets just imagine though that Sweden was communist. There are many ways that a communist state could get the amount of doctors that they need some more desirable for people than others. Many of these systems could be designed fairly though, meaning that everyone goes through the same process.
It could possibly be done similar to the US military where aptitude tests are taken and one must qualify for a job. It can be done morally even if you can't imagine it. Marjon This is exactly where I was waiting for you to go. In fact the best system would still encourage it somehow. This is the part that all of the greedy Americans miss. It is entirely possible that everyone gets paid the same yet the majority still tries to do their job well. You may be right that in a population the size of a major country it would be tough.
However there are income sharing communities inside the US and elsewhere that cooperatively grow their own food, build their own houses, and live together. You say there is no incentive to work hard. What about making your country or community great and functional. That is a noble goal. Dollar signs are the most important thing in the US. That doesn't mean they have to be. That is just our culture. Marjon It doesn't really matter how the government decides who can get married. If some people can and others can't thats immoral.
Saying that homosexuals have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex is like saying that all men in the untied states have the right to get a pap smear. Heterosexual marriage is useless to homosexuals. Pointing to this is more of a slap in the face than an expression of equality. We are getting away from the argument that socialism can be moral. I was just pointing out that there are immoral expressions in democracies too. Again this specific case of immorality doesnt mean that democracy is immoral just like it wouldnt mean socialism was.
They apparently hired them somewhere, because Sweden does have doctors, and ranks highly in many health categories. Marjon You are absolutley right "The military recruits doctors just like any hospital or clinic. The military doesn't give aptitude tests and force a new recruit to medical school for 8 years. Believe it or not some people choose to be doctors for reasons other than money.
Some people genuinely like to help others. Being a doctor is a great way to do this. Many doctors in ERs could make more money in a private practice yet stay in hospitals. Because money isn't why they became a doctor. People can be motivated by other things than money. Doctors in a socialist country would be people who wanted to help and also academically qualify. In a well set up system they would get recognition and honor for their effort, while recieving the same pay as everyone else. Recognition and honor are useless in the US culture where money drives most things.
Marjon "I prefer rewards based upon merit. So socialism isn't your preference. I do remember saying this, "And people I said it earlier but i'll say it again. I'll even grant that it is easier to have a moral democracy than a moral socialist country. Still doesn't mean either is impossible. Anyone else shocked when they loaded this article and saw how long the trolling comments go on for?
I'm gonna leave my mark too: Marjon "What kind of recognition and honor? Three letters after their name like PhD? In your mind if it isn't beneficial to only yourself it is worthless. But again thats your preference. I get it, you don't want to live in a socialist country. RJB26 "socialism is the preferred form of gov't for leaches who cant or wont fend for themselves and power hungry leftist douchebags who want to control the leaches who cant or wont fend for themselves.
You have added a lot of class legitimacy to our discussion. Marjon Doctors in a socialist country would be people who wanted to help and also academically qualify. Hate to burst your bubble, but a large percentage of physicians in socialized medicine nations leave for places like the US where they can make a buck instead of working for mechanics wages. Also, socialized medicine can't be all that good given how many come to the US from Europe and especially Canada for treatment. Hospitals in Detroit, including Henry Ford Hospital, have so many of them they've opened entire clinics just to treat them.
Seems if you're over 50 or have a disease that's expensive to treat esp. Don't say it doesn't happen I spent 30 years in health care and saw it all too often once Canada instituted their system. First you say that intelligent people like "novel" ideologies and then you say their ideology is "liberal" -- currently the most pervasive in the United States. Even a dummy like me can see polemic disguised as science!! Intelligent people can make rare-association better than average people, in other word, they're creative this doesn't mean they're more logical. This is because; general intelligence is physically related to number of neurons and interconnections , but, generally, higher IQ adolescent loss more neurons than average people [forgot] hence their intelligence could based upon more interconnection.
I found this comment box to be too claustrophobic. My point was; the dis-agreeable nature of intelligent people is caused by creative mind . Because imo rare association were often made to explain one's experience rather than using the obvious "god did it" reasoning. Ethinicity wasn't factored so the results are skewed. With that said, I personally suspect strongly the correlations are correct. All they had to do was change one aspect of this study for it to have merit. If they said smarter people tend to innovate within society and personal activities I think we'd all agree. I think that physorg was just down on its comment flame war traffic lately and decided to write such a poorly constructed article.
DocM "Hate to burst your bubble, but a large percentage of physicians in socialized medicine nations leave for places like the US where they can make a buck instead of working for mechanics wage" You didn't burst my bubble at all. I don't care where anyone wants to practice medicine or what kind of government they want to have. All I'm saying is that Socialism can be moral. Obviously Sweden would not be the ideal money making place for a doctor, you are right. I kinda like money myself, all I'm talking about is that not everyone is as obsessed with it as US citizens.
You guys can keep saying how terrible you think it would be allllllllll day but you are not affecting my argument or my bubble. Then it wouldn't be a study. The results are shown above. How about we repeat the study on someone of voting age and see where the stats stand? You have a very pretentious nick. Unless that's your real name?
Blood Orchid: An Unnatural History of America by Charles Bowden
In which case you have a very pretentious name. That is my real name. I guess my parents are pretentious people. They are too pushy and they shove their beliefs down other peoples' throats. That is not what true Christianity is all about, and that is not what I am all about. To me its not someone who sees themselves as a member of "an exclusivist group. It is not my place, or any other Christian's place to judge those who don't believe. It says it right in the Bible.
Christians are only to judge other Christians. So a Christian who judges a non-believer isn't following their own God its in the book of James. The problem with Christianity today is that it follows rules and traditions founded by men, not by God. I guess that once again, I'm an outlier. How do they do that? Infecting the laws of society with abstract morality and social preference instilled in the race through 2 thousand years of indoctrination of the ignorant for one.
Governments have the power to force you to do what they want. No, the people when attacked by their government have physical recourse. Christians can only persuade.
Frequently bought together
If their words make you feel bad, don't listen. If only that would make them stop. If people don't like what I write, ignore it. Apparently I hit a nerve or two with some as they can only respond with insults. If you consider our directions into discovering what actually represents a hypothesis, theory, and construct bothers you, feel free to ignore it.
Seems to be a bunch of secular socialists writing laws in Uganda to slaughter homosexuals. Also a bunch of socialists writing new laws in a certain southern US state to rewrite science and history in order to support a religion and its uneducated lackeys. The study specified that they looked at young adults i. Young adult is from age by most standards. IQ tests in adolescence do not equate to the results from contemporary IQ tests. So what you're saying is either there's NO correlation or there's absurdly weak correlation.
I cant believe such a dumb study is causing such a fuss at physorg. Ive been thinking about this study and come up with a solution that should make everyone happy. This study facts are right but its conculsions are wrong. Only the smartest liberal progressives who have mental disorders go into Psyscology, the rest either become congressmen, ACORN activists, inmates, or just go on welfare.
Only the dumbest christian or religious people, go into psychology as it is well known that Psychology professors are crazy leftwing progressives who hate christians, the USA, freedom and equality and will flunk anyone who disagree with their beliefs. So in this study they took the brightest progressives who are just marginally smarter than average and compared them to the dumbest christians who are just marginally dumber than average.
If they would have studied the real sciences and engineering depts. JayK proves the point that crazy leftwing progressives project their hate and ignorance onto others. He hates homosexuals so he assumes conservatives hate homosexuals. He is ignorant so he assumes conservatives are ignorant. If I as a conservative would do the same for JayK, I would consider him a nice honest, loving guy, who cared for his fellow man person.
Yeah, good thing I'm unable to find your comments from previous threads, huh? If they are forced to live there, that would be immoral. I don't really have time to create my own sovereign nation to validate my argument. Although I do seem to have copious amounts of time, as I have been trying to champion the mere possibility of something for days now. By doing a job like being an engineer one that you consider "real work" they are performing a necessary niche in that society.
The man that collects the trash apparently not working also gets that stuff away from your house that rots. Otto, James was written most likely around A. If history serves me, Rome was still purcecuting Christians at that time. I agree with you that teaching the origins of Christianity is lacking in the schools.
Either it is ignored or taught by professors who hate christianity. My kids have been taught more about the Muslim religion none of the negative stuff , Buhdism, than Christianity. What little they have been taught about Christianity is laughably wrong. Just because you associate some jobs with small dollar amounts does not mean that they don't need to be done for society to function correctly and if you wanted to live in a socialist state you would understand this. You say this is a society that is for leaches but it is for a society much more ambitious than ours because if everyone does not work to perform their job the society can collapse.
The people must have a sense of community and working towards a common goal. Much too hard for Americans. If they have to share with someone else, well there is absolutely no reason to try. Jayk, again you inner hate and homophobia is coming out. To learn more about Amazon Sponsored Products, click here. Each essay has the pace and narrative that is expected of well-crafted journalism and illuminates not only sport itself but the role it plays in the broader life of its participants.
For the subjects of these stories, sports are a way to understand who they are as human beings, and for the writers, they are a lens that brings the true subjects into sharper focus. Recommended for sports nuts looking for good, brief reads but also for fans of general nonfiction to whom sport may not have occurred as a topic for intellectual reading. Continuing the tradition in a long line of notable guest editors is Rick Telander, acclaimed journalist, author, and champion of the written word.
His choices are defined by one shared thread: The physical strength it takes to play professional hockey and football, or for a forty-two-year-old writer to learn how to dunk in six months. The mental and emotional toughness needed to turn around a losing team, or to speak out about a coach. The careful striving to make everything seem effortless. This edition encompasses it all. Would you like to tell us about a lower price? If you are a seller for this product, would you like to suggest updates through seller support? Learn more about Amazon Prime. Read more Read less.
Add both to Cart Add both to List. Buy the selected items together This item: Ships from and sold by Amazon. Customers who bought this item also bought. Page 1 of 1 Start over Page 1 of 1. Sponsored products related to this item What's this? Dynamics of News Reporting and Writing: Foundational Skills for a Digital Age. Extra Large Notebook, Lined Pages: Review "As usual, the selections are entertaining and informative deep dives into the sports world that will appeal to fans of general nonfiction as well as aficionados. Are all athletes the same person? Jul 21, Charles rated it it was amazing.
Worth it alone for the story on DiMaggio, and Hunter S. Still reading this bohemoth. Would also add the piece on Ty Cobb in the "worth it alone for If you can appreciate the sort of dry prose of print media writing from the 40s through the 70s Dec 20, J. This is a fantastic collection. Lots of boxing and baseball but there are some other sports represented.
Some of the biggest names in writing are represented as well. It's a book I wish didn't have a last page. It's a book I finished and immediately wanted to start reading again. Dec 29, Dan rated it really liked it Shelves: Some amazing pieces on great athletes and sporting moments over the last years.
Jun 30, Oliver Hodson rated it it was amazing. A brilliant book, and whatever they left out, this was a well composed and complete edition. It had nice touches, like the ali section and the smart arrangement of the pirces throughout. Testifying to the sad fact that elite mental and emotional health aren't always bedfellows with elite sport, but also to the great drama and possibility of sport, it was a great collectikn, and a great read. Feb 02, Ben rated it it was amazing. Whether or not you are a sports fan, this anthology contains some of the finest examples of Twentieth Century journalism.
Although many are seemingly about sports, when you peel the layers away, the consistent theme is the triumphs and defeats of the human spirit. The piece on Bobby Fischer is a marvelous example of the kind of journalism that seems to have been driven out by Fox News. Apr 01, Candy rated it it was amazing. It was like getting to sit in on a writing clinic by the best of the best. For a kid who decided when she was 9 years old that she wanted to be a sportswriter, this was a treat and quite possibly the best Christmas present ever.
May 18, Maya rated it liked it. This is a pretty broad look at good sports writing, which is what it promises. It goes without saying, "best" is subjective. Some stories are not as gripping as others, and this will depend on the reader. By contrast, I am now also reading a compilation of best baseball writing- this is obviously a more focused exploration, and because of my affinity for baseball is more often hitting the mark. Jul 03, Michael rated it it was amazing Shelves: Glorious, lives up to the title!
Smashed my highest expectations with definitive pieces that put so much Internet journalism to shame. On my short list of books for a desert island or a new civilization. What can I say? The raw heart of victory and defeat, fate and chance, strength, sweat, brilliance, blood, and folly beats steady in these pages.
The title is exact: Award winning stuff here. A great book to pick up whenever you have fifteen minutes to spare and want to indulge terrific writing. Sep 28, Clinton Murphy rated it really liked it. A comprehensive volume focusing mostly on the sports I love the best, horse racing, baseball, and of course, boxing.
It took me quite some time to get through it all but almost every story contained within reminded me what is best about sports and, as such, best about people. Sep 21, Joe C rated it it was amazing. Some real gems in here - especially the Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio stories which are also available online. Dec 09, Charles rated it it was amazing. The best single-volume collection of American sportswriting, with a mix of old and new, long and short, serious and playful pieces. May 02, James is currently reading it.
This is a pretty fun book so far. I've only read a couple of the essays so far, but the Joe DiMaggio one is great.
Blood Orchid: An Unnatural History of America
Jan 03, Todd Putney rated it really liked it. Apr 30, Erin Geismar rated it really liked it. Jul 20, Barbara Carpenter rated it liked it. Some of the stories were quite good - the first one about Secretariat, "Pure Heart" and "Fly Away Home" about homing pigeons in particular.