- cross-posted to:
- 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- cross-posted to:
- 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
You must log in or register to comment.
I know this is a joke thread, but I think this is a great example of a poorly designed survey question that charitable people would say ‘generates discussion’. I would say it enables confirmation bias and just creates animosity amongst people looking for reasons to dislike an imaginary other.
My instinct when I first saw reporting of this was, yeah I probably could. But that’s because I read the question as me being able to play until I won a point. If I even won one, even by a double fault, I win. When I said as much on social media people jumped on me. But here’s the thing, I think theres like a 99.8% chance that the world’s best Female tennis player wins any given point against me. I’m just expecting one shanked return from 500 efforts.
Then uproar. Because it’s only because she’s a woman. Except… Well there isn’t an equivalent question for Novak Djokovic! So people are jumping to conclude reasoning, and YouGov is formenting that by reporting on a shoddy question with no control to give us a benchmark. For the record I think on average I’d have to wait longer to win a point against the worlds best male tennis player, because they serve so much faster, but I don’t think I’d be waiting forever.
So people read the question and assume both that the question refers to a one point shoot out, and they already think the greater portion of men are misogynists. Well then that’s the explanation! It cannot be an ambiguous question interpreted differently!
And I’m not denying that for some people the worst explanation is unfortunately the correct one. But I do have an issue with people dismissing or ignoring fairly rational objections to the survey or interpretations of it because of their pre-existing biases.
How many of these 8 men have seen her play? Or even know how to themselves?
Yes
Having played tennis for nearly a decade, I can say with some assurance that I would get served.
Removed by mod
…and?
Explain why this comment is relevant.
Removed by mod
Winning a point is a very low bar. You don’t have to beat her. You don’t have to win a set or a game. You just have to score a single point. All it takes is a single mistake from your opponent to win a point. With enough time even the best will make a mistake, and tennis matches are long.
The shortest possible game is 4 points. A set without a tie breaker has 6 games. A women’s tournament match is best 2 sets of 3. So at minimum a match of tennis has 48 points. You only need one.
If you’re passible enough to return the ball some of the time, and do a valid serve you will probably win a point at some point. She may be one of the best tennis players of all time, but she’s not infallible. Its really unlikely she wouldn’t mess up at least once.
Specifically, in a match of minimum 48 points to have a chance of 80% of scoring a single point you need to be at least as good as 3.3% of her. Or in other words, she can be 30 times better than you. If your expectation is just a 50% chance to score a single point, it is enough to be 1.5% good as her, so she can be 67 times better than you.
Sex aside, i wouldn’t assume pro athletes to be 67x better than i am in many sports. Usain Bolt is not running 67x faster than i am, nor is Michael Phelps swimming 67x faster than i am.
In other words: This study is not a test for the arrogance of men, but rather a test for the statistical aptitude of humans. Which general is terrible.
Athletic skill:athletic feat isn’t a linear scale - Phelps might not be 67x faster than you but he is absolutely 67x(+++) more skilled. There’s pretty much zero chance you pick up a win vs him unless he dies mid race or something
don’t forget that it’s possible to have an entire classroom of people so utterly inept in the field of motor skills and hand eye coordination that not one of them could serve or return a serve in the whole 5 days dedicated to tennis.
Unless she kills you before you can score the point.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatalities_while_playing_tennis
blank page hmmmmm
It’s really hard to get the button presses in fast enough in a professional tennis match
Stefan Edberg’s errant shot contributed to the death of a linesman back in 1983.
Quick Google search got me that. Really easy. Literally exactly what the meme is saying: a tennis ball could make a lethal strike. You’re just full of shit all throughout this thread.
“contributed to” vs “killing me instantly”
I wish I had the reading comprehension to find the obvious difference between these two statements, but alas it is impossible no one is that comprehensive.
The survey is specifying one game though, not a set or a tournament. I don’t know the rules of tennis, but i don’t think Serena will let a single point through.
Do we know though if the survey clarified, that by game they mean a game in the Tennis sense, so up to 4 points, or if it means the typical way the game is played, which is in a match of 3?
E.g. when i talk about playing a round of counter-strike i also mean to play a game of 15/15 and not a single 3 minute round. Meanwhile in football the term is also a “match” but we call the halves halves and not “games”.
The way terms are used differ from popular language and specific language, so it needs to be clarified.
Whoa, there partner. You can’t read and understand the way the question was framed, this is the internet!
Fair. If I’m serving, maybe I wait until she falls asleep and that’s how I get my point
She is the kind of person that wouldn’t disrespect an opponent by playing a lazy game, so 100% this.
The question is “Could you win a point in a game of tennis…”. Technically it doesn’t specify that it has to be a single game. You could play a million games against her, and as long as you score one point, you still “won a point in a game of tennis”. Notably, it also says “could” rather than “would” so its just asking for a >0% possibility, under any circumstance. She is still human, so theres enough factors that something “could” allow a win. Is this completely overthinking this and going against the spirit of the question? Yes, but we’re already talking about the absurd hypothetical of putting a random non-athlete in a potentially infinite number of games against a professional athlete, so…
Tennis isn’t played one game at a time. It is played one match at a time. Any point is one point in a game.
And this is where reading comprehension is important. It doesn’t say what you want it to say. It says “game”. Not match, not set, not anything else.
wElL aKsHuLly…
No. Just no. You’re the 1 in 8 delusional person who thinks they could take on a top 1% athlete just because she’s a woman.
I’ve just gone and copied the wording from the link…
Do you think if you were playing your very best tennis, you could win a point off Serena Williams?
If you actually had the reading comprehension that you claim you would have noticed that only men were surveyed.
Not true either, someone has linked the survey question above 12% of men said yes, 3% of women
Sure, but the cited 12% only took results from men.
If I am delusional let it be known that its in an overwhelmingly uncommon way.
Are you really trying to fact check me because I used the 1 in 8 statistic and you’re not a guy? Talk about moving goal posts. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s one game. You’re a jackass not worth arguing with. Have a night as great as yourself.
You’re the one who decided to go with personal attacks. If you want to insult someone at least give them the courtesy of reading their username.
Also you’re on the silly meme community why are you taking this so seriously?
I feel like if the best reason one has for how they might be able to score a point on her is “but she could make a mistake” they’ve kind of conceded that it’s not actually possible.
Exactly. It’s basically some “infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters” shit.
“Well if I had enough time eventually they will make a mistake and I’d get a point on a technicality so yeah, I could totally do it!”
This person remembers they have to serve too, right? And actually return the ball. They won’t win just standing there and praying.
I take it you’re not a tennis fan. You absolutely can win not only a point but a game (4 points) just by standing there. It’s called a double fault and they happen all the time.
In 2014 Serena Williams lost a match after double faulting 4 times in a row to lose a game. She is not immune to double faults!
I don’t know if one in 8 men even play tennis. I guess I would hit the ball but would it get over the net?
I know when I did tennis in gym class in high school I struggled to figure out how to keep the ball in the court.
You know I didn’t consider this as a problem where games and time approach infinity.
You see, Serena Williams has a preset kill limit. Knowing her weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at her until she reached her limit and shut down.
