We all like winners - just not when they win all the time

Being currently based on a couch in Yonkers, New York,  has given me ample time to watch SportsCenter on ESPN. For readers not familiar with this show, its essentially round the clock sports news, summed up best by this clip from Will Ferrell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhcnngr0Dbo

Even for as ardent a sportsfan as myself, it's nauseating.

The latest news story that the station has got into a tizzy over is the NBA and NHL drafts. Simplistically under a draft system the club who finished last the previous season, has first choice of a player pool. This pool generally consists of young players never exposed to professional sports, mixed with players recently released by their clubs. Having personally guided players through the AFL draft, I doubt if there is a more nerve-wrecking experience for the young hopefuls, as they wait for their names to be called out. The purpose of this blog is not to discuss why I think this system is infinitely unfair on players but on the lengths sports go to, to maintain "competitive balance".

The notion put forward by most sports governing bodies is for their sport to strive, an even playing field must be maintained. To roll this even playing field, they use techniques like a draft system, a salary cap or a handicap system. As the gap between the rich and the poor in English Football gets to American society levels pundits continue to clamor to regain some form of competition. Since the arrival of the Premier League only 4 teams have lofted the trophy. In that time only 7 teams have won the FA Cup. Stepping it up a level and only 2 English teams have won a Champions League. It doesn't take a genius to work out that there are a lot more fans not celebrating then celebrating come late May. Oh how the Newcastle fans among us dream of throwing away 12 point leads again. This doesn't even begin to look at the impending financial armagedon facing clubs. My esteemed colleague, Greg, covered that on Wednesday (http://kingbetireland.blogspot.com/2011/06/putting-lid-on-it-case-for-wage-caps.html). 

Talk Is Cheap

Nobody can deny it, David Haye talks a good game. But the time for talking is nearly over. Tomorrow night at the Imtech Arena in Hamburg, Haye (25-1, 23ko's) faces Wladimir Klitschko (55-3, 49 ko's) in the hugely anticipated heavyweight title clash. Haye puts his WBA World Heavyweight title on the line against Klitschko's IBF, IBO and WBO belts in a mouth watering unification fight that has finally got people excited about a heavyweight bout. Boxing's heavyweight division has gone through a considerable lull over the past decade or so and this fight seems to have got the public's attention with this being billed as the most tantalising heavyweight tussle since Lennox Lewis stepped into the ring against Mike Tyson in 2002.

Much of the credit for this must go to Haye. His constant insults and jibes have fueled the interest levels of the ordinary boxing fan and got people talking. He more than anyone else has sold this fight. He has adopted many derisory tactics in the lead up to the fight including wearing a t-shirt of the severed heads of Wladimir and his brother Vitali. Some have questioned these tactics but Haye seems to be happy with the path he has chosen. He's obviously trying to get under the skin of the giant Ukranian and feels that by angering him, he may take him out of his comfort zone, making him take a more aggressive approach and in doing so, leaving him open to be hit when they finally step in the ring. While I think some of Haye's antics have been well below the belt, I don't think it has been enough to overly affect Wladimir's preparation. Klitschko is the consummate professional and it seems almost impossible to ruffle him. He has come across really well in the build up and seems to be single minded in his quest to make Haye his 50th knock out victim.

Quadrangle - a shape with only four sides

This week’s article is a look at the rugby world cup, which begins in September. It is said that the best predictor of future actions is past behaviour. Therefore the focus will be on past world cups and their eventual winners since 1995. 1995 is the first world cup I watched and also the first competition to contain South Africa. They had previously been excluded due to their apartheid politics.

Including 1995 three teams have won the competition: South Africa, Australia and England. South Africa winning in both 1995 and 2007 are, along with Australia, the only team to win two world cups. New Zealand won the inaugural trophy in 1987.

There you have it six competitions four different winners. It is difficult to imagine another winner of the trophy however. Everyone knows that France are closest to being included in this elite group of winners. Two weeks ago I included examples of the sublime rugby France have played in the World Cup. Their inconsistency though has prevented them from winning the competition.

Putting a Lid on it: The Case for Wage Caps.

The present spate of transfer mania in European football is, in many ways, worryingly reminiscent of the peak of the property boom. Clubs are building up ever larger piles of debt, players are being traded for transfer fees that bear no resemblance to their revenue-generating potential, and the business plan seems to be buy, buy, buy. Most ominously, salaries seem to have lost any grip on reality. Without any form of regulation, catastrophe is imminent, particularly among lower clubs, but also among some of the biggest names in the sport. Even mighty Real Madrid are not immune from the danger, as mounting debts and a trophy drought may force a serious reappraisal of the clubs financial priorities.

Those footballing observers who subscribe to the ideas of Adam Smith and Milton Friedman might ask "so what?". The free market has losers too. If a club is dumb enough to overspend and goes to the wall, that's their business. The problem is that this presupposes that normal market forces are at play in Europe. This is a deeply flawed assumption.

Senna – Film Review

In less than ten years in Formula One Ayrton Senna carved out a legacy which is still felt in the sport today, nearly twenty years on from his untimely death at Imola in 1994. His unique ability to seemingly push the cars he drove beyond their physical and mechanical limits in order to achieve victory is something which is gravely missing from modern day motorsport. Senna is the documentary film on his life at the pinnacle of F1 and it demonstrates brilliantly the man’s passion for raw speed, his incredible humility in victory and defeat and above all his unflinching quest to win.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvSgJDIsRnc&w=560&h=349]

My first memories of Formula One occur after the death of Ayrton Senna, I do not remember him racing which is not surprising coming from a GAA background where motorsport was never high on the agenda in household. The first race which I actually remember was the final race of the 1994 season, the Australian Grand Prix in Adelaide. This was the infamous race where Michael Schumacher in his Benetton Ford blatantly tried to ram Damon Hill’s Williams Renault off the road, putting him out of the race and damaging Hills car so badly he could not continue.

Experience is the key

                    ‘Relevant qualifications and a minimum of three years experience required.’ Anyone who has ever applied for a job has seen this. Chances are that if you are fresh out of university you have got the qualifications but lack the experience. It’s a catch 22, if they give you the job, you’ll have a chance to gain experience but they won’t give you the job because you’re lacking in experience. So what do you do? You could try and develop your skills by working at something similar or with a smaller company, i.e. go out on loan ala David Beckham at Preston North End. You could emigrate, ala Mike Ross at Harlequins or you could catch a lucky break, ala Tom Brady (sixth round draft pick that got his opportunity when Drew Bledsoe got injured and is now one of the best quarterbacks of all time). It’s clear where these companies are coming from though; ‘you can’t put a price on experience’, a saying that Arsene Wenger seems to ignore. Beckham and Ross clearly benefited from their respective decisions and Tom Brady wasn’t a complete novice, having started every game in Michigan in his last two years there.

European Grand Prix Predictions

The European Grand Prix is on this afternoon and for a man living in the UK with no access to RTE it is probably the sporting highlight of the day.

Vettel is accurately priced at 4/6.  Last year he led from pole to the chequered flag and it would be a big statement to say that he isn’t able to do the same again today.  Button made the podium last year after qualifying 7^th, this year he qualified 6^th. His fluent driving and smooth braking appear to be giving him an advantage in the closing stages of races this year as he seems to be able to preserve the Pirelli tyres better than the majority of his competitors.  He will be one to watch. 

Massa, the winner here in 2008, is starting from 5^th will not be seen in many tipping columns today.  He is definitely the number two driver at Ferrari and he could easily be asked to move over for Alonso if Ferrari are running 1^st and 2^nd.  However he is currently over 100/1 on betfair which is a ridiculous price. If you ran this race 100 times, Massa would win at least once and hence is value.  It is not going to happen but it is definitely worth a cheeky bet.

The weather will be perfect today in Valencia so we will not see the topsy turvy race that we witnessed two weeks in rain drenched Montreal.  However there are some interesting prices in the top 6 betting market.  Schumacher 15/8, Heidfeld 3/1 and Petrov 4/1.  Those three start on the grid from 8^th, 9^th and 11^th respectively.  Heidfeld probably represents the best value at 3/1.  He qualified for the final qualifying session but did not complete a lap in order to save his tyres as Renault felt that this represents their best strategy for Sunday.  All three are worth a bet in my very unqualified opinion.