![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
In terms of pysical tasks requiring skill, I find little more satisfying than solidly hitting a well thrown baseball.
I went to the cages yesterday with a few of my buddies. I haven't played proper baseball in a long while. I do, on occaison, play softball. So I ventured into the Fast Pitch cage, which is a good challenge. Had a few quality socks. It's pretty cathartic for me.
Later, I went over to the baseball cage, and egged on, stepped into the 80 MPH cage. That was a bad decision. In addition to looking lousy, I fouled a pitch off my leg and now have a nice sized welt right on my ankle. Youch.
Was thinking about the inadequacy of that bad Hammer metaphor in BtVS-7. (Perhaps because I used a sledge the other day to help my dad dislodge a dead stump)
When I played company-league softball in high-school, I swung a 34 ounce bat. That's a heavy bat. The heavier the bat, the more power you have. Nowadays, though, I swing a 28 ounce bat. You can't generate as much power with that bat - but I'm more likely to hit the ball well swinging that 28 ounce bat.
Power vs. Control, right?
In the words of Lee Corso: "Not so fast, my friends."
The issue isn't power vs. control. It's a question of skill. Power is a function of kinetic energy. Which means it's mass times velocity (squared). The assumption that I'd generate more power with that 34 ounce bat is dependent on holding velocity constant. Something I'm unable to do.
I can't swing a 34 oz bat as quickly as the 28. In fact, the speed gain more than offsets the mass reduction.
But even here, we have an assumption. The assumption is that I have a finite cap of skill, such that I must trade-off between swinging a heavy bat slowly and a light bat quickly. In absolute terms, this is always the case. But the optimal course, wouldn't be picking one bat or the other. There's a limit on how fast one can swing a bat. The optimal course would be developing my ability such that I could swing the heavier bat fast enough to take advantage of the added mass.
And when I was playing baseball regularly, that's what I did.
But in the case of Dave and baseball, I no longer play regularly. I face fast-pitch three to five times a summer. Might as well keep my level of effort constant and be content with my lighter bat.
But if I'm going to consider baseball an important skill in my life, then it'd be much smarter for me to improve my skill. That way, I'd be able to swing a heavier bat than my 28, and also be able to swing it faster than my 28. And I'd improve my atrophied muscular coordination, thus generating more power and more accuracy with my swing.
That's why the Hammer metaphor is so inadaquate.
Now perhaps, Xander is the sort of carpenter who only has one hammer, and is only going to use that hammer once or twice. But, if he has aspirations of being particularly effective - of being excellent - then he would use a light hammer for tasks that called for light hammering, and use a heavy hammer for tasks that called for heavy hammering. And he would hold the hammer at the balance point where he maximizes the potential of each hammer.
And maybe Willow's only going to use her magic the one time. In which case, a treade-off between power and control is an issue. But if she's really concerned with how effective she is when employing her skill, then she ought to just skip this trade-off concept. She could practice and become more skilled in applying her magic until she would have the correct amount of power (no more, no less) to do what she needed to do, and the control needed to do it effectively.
It's not about Power vs. Control. While power and control are functions of each other, they're more importantly a function of your skill. So the next time you find yourself lacking either the power or the control to accomplish what you want - don't think about how you'll have to balance the two. Think about how you need to improve your skills enough that you have both.
I went to the cages yesterday with a few of my buddies. I haven't played proper baseball in a long while. I do, on occaison, play softball. So I ventured into the Fast Pitch cage, which is a good challenge. Had a few quality socks. It's pretty cathartic for me.
Later, I went over to the baseball cage, and egged on, stepped into the 80 MPH cage. That was a bad decision. In addition to looking lousy, I fouled a pitch off my leg and now have a nice sized welt right on my ankle. Youch.
Was thinking about the inadequacy of that bad Hammer metaphor in BtVS-7. (Perhaps because I used a sledge the other day to help my dad dislodge a dead stump)
When I played company-league softball in high-school, I swung a 34 ounce bat. That's a heavy bat. The heavier the bat, the more power you have. Nowadays, though, I swing a 28 ounce bat. You can't generate as much power with that bat - but I'm more likely to hit the ball well swinging that 28 ounce bat.
Power vs. Control, right?
In the words of Lee Corso: "Not so fast, my friends."
The issue isn't power vs. control. It's a question of skill. Power is a function of kinetic energy. Which means it's mass times velocity (squared). The assumption that I'd generate more power with that 34 ounce bat is dependent on holding velocity constant. Something I'm unable to do.
I can't swing a 34 oz bat as quickly as the 28. In fact, the speed gain more than offsets the mass reduction.
But even here, we have an assumption. The assumption is that I have a finite cap of skill, such that I must trade-off between swinging a heavy bat slowly and a light bat quickly. In absolute terms, this is always the case. But the optimal course, wouldn't be picking one bat or the other. There's a limit on how fast one can swing a bat. The optimal course would be developing my ability such that I could swing the heavier bat fast enough to take advantage of the added mass.
And when I was playing baseball regularly, that's what I did.
But in the case of Dave and baseball, I no longer play regularly. I face fast-pitch three to five times a summer. Might as well keep my level of effort constant and be content with my lighter bat.
But if I'm going to consider baseball an important skill in my life, then it'd be much smarter for me to improve my skill. That way, I'd be able to swing a heavier bat than my 28, and also be able to swing it faster than my 28. And I'd improve my atrophied muscular coordination, thus generating more power and more accuracy with my swing.
That's why the Hammer metaphor is so inadaquate.
XANDER
Yeah, I get that. Figuring out how to control your magic seems a lot like hammering a nail. (Willow looks confused) Well, uh, hear me out. So you're hammering, right? OK, well at the end of the hammer, you have the power, but no control. It takes, like, two strokes to hit the nail in, or you could hit your thumb.
WILLOW
Ouch.
XANDER
So you choke up. Control, but no power. It could take like ten strokes to knock the nail in. Power, control. It's a tradeoff.
Now perhaps, Xander is the sort of carpenter who only has one hammer, and is only going to use that hammer once or twice. But, if he has aspirations of being particularly effective - of being excellent - then he would use a light hammer for tasks that called for light hammering, and use a heavy hammer for tasks that called for heavy hammering. And he would hold the hammer at the balance point where he maximizes the potential of each hammer.
And maybe Willow's only going to use her magic the one time. In which case, a treade-off between power and control is an issue. But if she's really concerned with how effective she is when employing her skill, then she ought to just skip this trade-off concept. She could practice and become more skilled in applying her magic until she would have the correct amount of power (no more, no less) to do what she needed to do, and the control needed to do it effectively.
It's not about Power vs. Control. While power and control are functions of each other, they're more importantly a function of your skill. So the next time you find yourself lacking either the power or the control to accomplish what you want - don't think about how you'll have to balance the two. Think about how you need to improve your skills enough that you have both.
no subject
Using the right tool for the right job doesn't just require possessing the right tool--it means recognizing the right tool. And using it properly.
-Rhi (who may have fallen off the deep end here....
no subject
That's what I was going for.
Using the right tool for the right job doesn't just require possessing the right tool--it means recognizing the right tool. And using it properly.
Exactly.
When I'm not being lazy, I get excited by the pursuit of excellence. And it's not a simple thing. Requires mental effort, practice, physical work, yada yada... It's just - to me - if you are going to do something, then you ought to strive to do it really well.
I was going to talk about this in terms of golf, except that I have little aptitude for the game, and it makes me very frustrated. To the extent that the stupid-hammer metaphor worked - it mostly works as a metphor for trying to play a full round of 18 holes with just a 3-Iron. The best you could do is just enough to not screw up horribly.
You can't challenge yourself to grow that way if you don't learn about the existence of other clubs, how and when to use each club, and then actually go out there and use them.