Hi all, thought I’d jump in here with a few comments.
I think Ryan brings up a fair point in that the thought patterns of poker players may be MORE naturally aligned with EA than other sports. I do, however, think that pro athletes are more focused on optimisation and potential shortcuts than the average person, given how short sport careers are and how hugely impactful a good shortcut/efficiency can be on career earnings. The focus is always on ‘better’, and I think I can use a narrative along those lines to help bring other athletes into alignment with EA principles.
Also, there is already an EA charity in the poker space, REG, who do a great job. So my question to myself some months ago was where could I make the most marginal impact given my skillset and network? I concluded that I have a very rare ‘in’ with pro athletes given that I can approach them from the same level rather than with manager-speak. I think this translates across codes, and have already had some buy-in from athletes in other sports than my own.
Ultimately the biggest snowball will be made with the buy-in of fans, but I also think this is a strength of the area—a lot of people seem to be strongly influenced by the opinions and actions of their sporting heroes. More influenced than makes sense, in my opinion, but this is a huge lever nonetheless. So regardless of whether the actual donation power of athletes is relatively small, I think the influence that athletes have with their followers could make up for that.
I wasn’t personally offended by Ryan’s comments and welcome any pushback or feedback the community has. I think it’s hugely useful and interesting.
I think the optimization mentality is a really big deal. There’s a reason the deliberate practice literature focused on the sports and arts. To the extent that this is translatable to other endeavors (as you and jsteinhardt alludes to), this can be a really big deal for optimization endeavors in EA.
I think this translates across codes
What does “code” mean in this context? Different language codes spoken among different sportspeople?
Ultimately the biggest snowball will be made with the buy-in of fans, but I also think this is a strength of the area—a lot of people seem to be strongly influenced by the opinions and actions of their sporting heroes. More influenced than makes sense, in my opinion, but this is a huge lever nonetheless
I think this makes a lot of sense. As Ryan and others have mentions, there might also be non-monetary EA goals that are useful as well, for example policy goals that are more cosmopolitan and future-oriented, or inspiring/mentoring future generations of researchers and policymakers.
By ‘code’ I mean sport. I’ve spoken to athletes from around 8 different sports thus far and have generally seen a lot of interest. But the big challenge is to go from hearing ‘that’s a cool idea’ to ‘how can I donate’.
I agree that inspiration and mentorship could both be huge, and I would also say that they begin from the same point of communication and education in the athlete community. The athletes can’t pass on what they don’t yet know.
Hi all, thought I’d jump in here with a few comments.
I think Ryan brings up a fair point in that the thought patterns of poker players may be MORE naturally aligned with EA than other sports. I do, however, think that pro athletes are more focused on optimisation and potential shortcuts than the average person, given how short sport careers are and how hugely impactful a good shortcut/efficiency can be on career earnings. The focus is always on ‘better’, and I think I can use a narrative along those lines to help bring other athletes into alignment with EA principles.
Also, there is already an EA charity in the poker space, REG, who do a great job. So my question to myself some months ago was where could I make the most marginal impact given my skillset and network? I concluded that I have a very rare ‘in’ with pro athletes given that I can approach them from the same level rather than with manager-speak. I think this translates across codes, and have already had some buy-in from athletes in other sports than my own.
Ultimately the biggest snowball will be made with the buy-in of fans, but I also think this is a strength of the area—a lot of people seem to be strongly influenced by the opinions and actions of their sporting heroes. More influenced than makes sense, in my opinion, but this is a huge lever nonetheless. So regardless of whether the actual donation power of athletes is relatively small, I think the influence that athletes have with their followers could make up for that.
I wasn’t personally offended by Ryan’s comments and welcome any pushback or feedback the community has. I think it’s hugely useful and interesting.
I think the optimization mentality is a really big deal. There’s a reason the deliberate practice literature focused on the sports and arts. To the extent that this is translatable to other endeavors (as you and jsteinhardt alludes to), this can be a really big deal for optimization endeavors in EA.
What does “code” mean in this context? Different language codes spoken among different sportspeople?
I think this makes a lot of sense. As Ryan and others have mentions, there might also be non-monetary EA goals that are useful as well, for example policy goals that are more cosmopolitan and future-oriented, or inspiring/mentoring future generations of researchers and policymakers.
Hi Linch,
By ‘code’ I mean sport. I’ve spoken to athletes from around 8 different sports thus far and have generally seen a lot of interest. But the big challenge is to go from hearing ‘that’s a cool idea’ to ‘how can I donate’.
I agree that inspiration and mentorship could both be huge, and I would also say that they begin from the same point of communication and education in the athlete community. The athletes can’t pass on what they don’t yet know.