[Cry Me A River]

I can't help but think this is no different from any athelete who takes his game seriously - If you're going to be a pro or world class athelete in this day and age you pretty much have to be watching film a substantial amount or time, you pretty much have to be on a very specialised diet, you pretty much have to be scrutinising the technical aspects of your game at the most minute level, you pretty much have to be prepared to have a coach tell you how you need to change your form. I don't expect any of these are particularly 'fun' but they're essential to being competitive.

Which of course is completely different from a guy who just plays pick-up games in the park. There's a world of difference between "casual" and "serious" in anything. There's nothing wrong with wanting to take it a lot less seriously - You wouldn't be the first "athelete" to retire at the peak of his career.


I'm sure no track star likes to be told they're running "wrong" or that they've been nowehere near their personal best in the last 4 meets. But how else are you going to improve if you don't learn and build on what you've done before? I think the mistake here is not the use of statistics, it's their misuse. You shouldn't be using the stats to beat yourself up over a bad run* you should be using them to keep solidifying and improving your game.

Sure, any team that goes on a 10 game loosing skid is going to get down on itself, but any coach in the world is going to tell you the only way to get out of it is to emphasise and build on the positive; Keep it simple, don't try to do too much and make sure you get the fundamentals right then the rest will come naturally.



*You can't tell me when you weren't tracking your stats that you never got upset when you were on a bad run...