Fixing Fixing Fixing!!!

The so called spot fixing scandals becoming breaking news each day in all news channels are appalling to many, but whenever I think about the fundamental basis on which an action like fixing of a spot in a match or a session or a complete match is considered wrong, I find that it is hardly a strong one to justify putting someone behind bars or banning to play for life. If you look at it in many logical and practical ways, it is not even wrong, and takes place in many other professional and personal contexts where we don't complain and consider it totally fine. Here are a few arguments to substantiate my point.

Does one always play to win? -  Consider this: The underlying assumption in every sports-viewer's mind is that each of the players in both teams is giving his/her best in all ways possible to make his/her team win. I find it absurd that one must consider this implicit even in the conventionally cleanest of the games. While drawing from what Adam Smith said long back, if each player plays best for himself/herself, the team as a whole does best, with survival of the fittest players in the team. However, the best of the players individually may not be good team-players, for example mutual rivalry between some can harm the team and even lead to losing overall. But again applying the Adam Smith logic to teams, the teams that would survive, will be those that have the best combination of talented players, individual efforts, team efforts and whatever it takes for a team to win or survive in a competitive environment where limited resources will allow only a certain number of teams to exist and participate in the show. The simple postulate of modern economics and the science of evolution leads to unimaginable complexity as it applies to each level and layer, of which I mentioned only 2. But there is a basic flaw in the way we would ideally apply it to sports in the contemporary world and therefore assuming that each player up there is doing what is in the best interests of his/her career, his/her team and the sport he/she's part of. The flaw is in our understanding of the ultimate goal of the entire system. Sports at professional levels are not played for self-actualization or pleasure. They are played to make money. And if winning or playing well does not necessarily make as much money, then although the postulate of economics and evolution stands true, the operating model at each layer to reach the actual eventual goal is different from what we assume it to be. Now let us apply the postulate to the revised goal - a player who does his/her best in earning money through ways and means available to him/her (which may also include playing well) and also does things collectively with other players in the team, which help the team stay in a competitive position vis-a-vis other teams, such player succeeds. Now with the revision of the ultimate goal, it is impossible that players in a match are all playing to make their team win. Overall, they may be boosting the earnings of their team in the process of boosting their own. But with externalities like fixing money on offer very easily, the players do not necessarily earn best if the team goes on winning. And since the matches don't happen on another planet, externalities will come into play in whatever manner possible, coz they have their incentives too.

Then why do we blame these players for indulging in something that is in line with their professional goals? Just coz it is not in line with our foolish assumptions, which interestingly are so sticky, that I find it amusing how irrational we are in our thought processes. And this is true especially of sports, coz somehow we are not able to digest that this could be so rampant, while the same sort of fixing happens in the so called Reality Shows, and we don't complain, although it is much more understood there to all of us, and we even enjoy the spice that it adds.

One can argue that Fixing of matches is illegal, and therefore it is wrong. But again, legality of an action is based on where it stands vis-a-vis expected and accepted behavior. But if our expectations are foolish, why should law not be fixed by some wise individuals, who are supposed to have better understanding of right and wrong. But then, we are democratic on the surface and hard nuts on the inside - in other words screwed at both levels, coz we are eventually humans - and we are like that only :). An amazing fact is that we can fool ourselves by feeling real emotions by watching movies where people pretend and lie, i.e., act, and create situations that don't exist and may never possibly exist. Can we sue an Ekta Kapoor for bombarding a considerable chunk of educated Indian population with unrealistic family dramas full of lies, politics, murders, and also love and beauty, in the name Indian culture by manipulating the minds of innocent individuals in the way they perceive the world? Or should we sue Steven Spielberg for making a movie with Dinosaurs! We don't - coz we enjoy fiction and wild imagination. That's human. But we do try to draw a line by calling something too outrageous even for us to see, coz we do acknowledge that our minds are vulnerable.

But the case with sports is different. And I am surprised it is not the same with Reality Shows. We get entertained by matches because of the uncertainty of the outcome and the inherent action during the course of the match. The reason we are put off by fixing is that it sucks to know that the outcome of the match and even some of the events during the match we saw had been decided beforehand by someone, the element of reality in the action that stunned and inspired us may have been enacted, and it was all possibly a drama. We do enjoy movies, though, especially when we don't know the outcome. But with sports, our expectations are different. We expect universal uncertainty and genuine human effort, coz finally those are the very entertaining elements of sports. While for movies, it is much wider - the experience of emotions, the small bits that we relate to, the artistic appreciation, sexual appeal and the climax, which does not have to be uncertain to be likeable, but should rather appeal to our dreams or desires or sense of right-wrong or hormones or something else, coz there are many movies we can watch hundreds of times and like every time. I guess that's why they make reality shows so bitchy and sexy, so that we don't complain of fixing and just enjoy the show. In many ways IPL has tried to become like that and is becoming better at it. But it needs more masala to be a hit reality show, for people to look at it like one and also enjoy it like that. In parallel, views need to change, law needs to fix itself, some cleanup definitely needs to happen, and Arnab Goswami needs to calm down :). But then, he works for money too, and this is what earns him best these days! Consider this - when corruption is a hot topic, news channels gain if more and more leaders are corrupt and if they are able to break bigger and bigger scandals. Possibly some of them fix people too - reminds me of Zee News vs Naveen Jindal case.

We a kewl bunch of fewls!!!

The Sanjay Dutt Case

Was watching a debate just now between Justice Katju and Subramanian Swamy on pardoning Sanjay Dutt. The former thinks Sanjay Dutt should be pardoned on humanitarian grounds, while the latter quotes some Articles and says pardoning is justified only if it serves some public good. Justice Katju does not deny Swami, but goes on to quote some Nanavati case where the pardon was granted in spite of no public good served. The grounds, as pointed by Arnab Goswami - the anchor of the debate, were not Humanitarian either, in case of the Nanavati case. They were all power and politics. After hearing both sides in the debate today, and they are probably going to be the two sides in Supreme Court soon, and from my own point of view, I feel there is no reason to pardon Sanjay Dutt. The sentence is not so severe - just 3 more years, and is in fact in proportion to the crime committed. Also Dutt is not a poor guy who's lived under social torture, seclusion or abandonment, nor has be been thrown into gutter or ill-treated by society or anything which can be said to be even remotely equivalent to already having suffered for what he's done. He's lived a great celebrity life, so rewarding that his going to jail is gonna hurt business lobbies, and so they want him out. It's all money speaking now. The only possible public good I can see in granting him pardon is to set an example by penalizing our judicial system in a way for being so slow and late in pronouncing judgments and closing appeals, so as to make sure the same thing doesn't happen in future, and Dutt being a harmless person now, there will be no public harm by his being out. But I am 100% sure that our judicial system will not improve by this one case. For one, this is India. And secondly, the backlog itself must be so huge that even wanting to improve the scenario won't lead us far. On the contrary, we will end up setting examples for hundreds of such cases of delayed judgments, who will start demanding pardon quoting Dutt's precedent. So, forget it. To conclude, it is not justified that the whole intellectual machinery of the country debates this case of a celebrity, except for increasing TRP ratings of TV channels and for bringing more people in limelight for having points of view and claim to 2 minutes of fame.

Goa Trip Takeaways

For most people, Goa is only about beaches and beer. So it was for me too, until I went alone to a less explored part of Goa last week and had wonderful 3 days amidst nature and myself. I also met some great people, can call them my friends now, with whom I had many interesting conversations on a wide range of topics. The place was Devaaya at Divar Island in Goa. It calls itself an Ayurveda & Nature Cure Center. But I would call it more of a place for relaxation and being with oneself away from the noisy world, in quiet with only the sounds of nature. On the whole, it was an intellectual journey. I felt rejuvenated by the Yoga sessions they had every morning, the delicious food they offered, reading and introspecting for hours sitting at the banks of Mandovi River and sleeping in my beautiful room on my comfortable bed. They did have guided meditation sessions - sitting and listening to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's audio and following his instructions - but they failed to have any impact on me - possibly because I find that guy's voice, style and personality very irritating and fraudulent - although this is just a feeling without knowing much about him - but an opinion formed is formed and am not interested in getting it right about this guy by looking for more information.

The best part of my journey and stay at Goa was talking to unknown people. The only Indians in the resort at that time were me and a Punjabi family. The rest were all foreigners - about 40 from various countries in Europe. So it did indeed feel a little weird initially. But I soon got used to it, although I always felt like I was in a foreign country coz, besides the foreigners, the place has a homely touch to the way it is built and maintained, and also has the cleanliness and etiquette of a western country. But I realized that in spite of the different ways we build and decorate our surroundings, we are all inherently the same. Life is complex, but the complexity is strikingly similar the world over. I realize this every time I speak to a stranger. I start over with a basic and implicit set of assumptions about the person, although not consciously - I guess the overall personality is drawn in my subconscious mind based on my past experiences with people who look and behave in the manner I can make out from the first glances at the stranger - and this picture of the person adjusts itself as I talk and acquire more information. I am not sure of the degree of precision of the picture our mind draws of the stranger's personality before we initiate conversation - it may be very high because it involves our learnings from the past - it may be very low as it must be needlessly biased and affected by past experiences - it may be very high coz it involves our gut feel which is supposed to give us right advice, but who knows. However, I don't find it difficult now in finding things to talk about. People the world over have similar issues and problems with the world and life. For example - relationships, politics, money, power, cheating, values, emotions, and a million other things - are so strikingly similar and relevant to all our lives that you can relate to any one in the world, if you are really interested to. But not every person would be easy and nice to talk to as personalities vary and compatibility between individuals is a real thing. That explains why I started talking to many, but with only one I talked many many times with increasing comfort.

This is the first time I went to a new place alone as a tourist. I am very encouraged by the experience and will definitely do it again. Next time - When? Where? Let's see!

Indian Culture on the Road

The Culture of a people is sum of stuff like religious beliefs, social structure and values, art forms, books and tales, leaders, racial mix, immigration, emigration, history and economics, and a lot more. And it is constantly changing with each passing moment creating a new set of these variables. It's not necessarily evolving, as human history tells us we have always found ways to screw up our lives and those of others on grounds so stupid that we feel ashamed of ourselves, and we are definitely not getting more civilized in our ways. (What does "civilized" mean anyway?)

I think a great way to evaluate the culture of a Nation is to study how people behave on its roads. Look at India for example. The following, which I witness every day, characterize our behavior on roads in general:

• Extremely poor adherence to traffic rules is a characteristic of India on the streets. The unwritten and unacknowledged, yet all-pervading rules are the following:
• Totally ignore all traffic rules when there is no Traffic police watching
• No need to bother about the traffic signal if there is no traffic police around
• Leads to mass traffic signal violation and dangerously concentric traffic, which somehow escapes collisions
• The irony is that even those who want to follow traffic rules are forced to join the herd, otherwise they'll be crushed by the stampede of vehicles
• In case of heavy traffic, while everyone trying to push his/her way through invariably leads to a logjam, yet  nobody gives way to anyone else
• Don't give way to anyone, even if it is an ambulance with its siren roaring loudly
• It is perfectly fine to stop your vehicle in the middle of the road even for trivial reasons without bothering you are blocking the traffic
• Narrow roads without exists and space for stopping is definitely one reason, but what's really alarming is the total insensitivity with which some people stop and don't bother for a long time
• If someone shouts at you, simply shout back, irrespective of whose mistake it is
• Honk as much as you can to make way for yourself
• Look down upon everyone else on the road especially those with smaller vehicles
• Believe in Me first, everyone else later, as far as possible
• If you hit someone, run away if you are sure you won't be caught
• If you are in a car, you don't need to worry if you are splashing water or dust on someone walking by the road-side
• If you are in a car, those on 2-wheelers and those on foot are a nuisance. If you are on a 2-wheeler, those on cycles and those on foot are a nuisance. If you are on a cycle or if you are on foot, everyone who is on a motor vehicle is a nuisance. If you are on foot, everyone who is on a vehicle of any sort is a nuisance.
• Lanes drawn on the roads are just for aesthetic appeal, and they are not meant for anything else
• It is sometimes fun to drive with one of those white lines running through the middle of your car
• And of course, the concept of lanes does not apply to a vehicle with less than 4 tires
• Taking random turns at will and assuming those behind will notice and apply brakes
• If you hit someone, fight with all your might but never accept your mistake
• If yours is a bigger vehicle, you can assume everyone else will give you way
• Honk often to clear the road and make way for yourself
• Tease girls and women on the roads
• ...
• ...
• ...

And so on... I think all the above together portray Indian Culture to a great extent, if not completely. The aspects which I see coming out clearly are - Corruption, Hypocrisy, Lying, Deception, Cheating, Cruelty, Dishonesty, Cowardice, Herd Mentality, Pretension, Selfishness, Self Centeredness, Carelessness, Recklessness, Ruthlessness, Immaturity, Distrust, Weakness, Apathy, Lasciviousness, Power Hunger, Avariciousness, Arrogance, Atheism, Argumentativeness, Ignorance, etc. etc. etc.

Herd Mentality

Following the herd is a natural tendency in all humans. We grow up focussing on specific subjects in school, we take up specific & popular streams for professional studies and most of us land up in similar jobs, if we are from a similar social, economic and educational backgrounds. And those who choose to enter business, some of them called entrepreneurs, pick popular lines of business and end up repeating, without much of a difference, something done by many others.

I was fortunate to study in an IIM for 2 years during which I saw herd mentality demonstrated in the most conspicuous ways by some of the most intelligent people. As soon as you join, the seniors bombard you with theories on how to spend your time best at IIM - what to do, which committees to target, which courses to take, Consulting or I-Banking or Marketing or Entrepreneurship, which companies to look forward to, how to prepare for them, importance of building your CV, importance of building your CGPA, importance of participating in all kinds of competitions, etc. And all this takes only moments to get ingrained into each of those heads listening intently hoping to making it big in life. The brains are instantly reconfigured with new dreams, new ambitions, new desires. My batch was fooled by telling us BCG was coming on the day we joined, for recruiting for summer internships, and believe me, almost the entire batch went crazy preparing CVs. The seniors even did a fake pre-placement talk. Many who didn't care still went ahead and submitted their CVs, coz everyone else was doing so. A few didn't bother, mostly coz they knew it was all a hoax. Very few actually didn't care and didn't do anything, and had the nerves to tell those "angry" seniors that they didn't give a damn. A lot of such pressure tactics were applied officially and unofficially - by calling it a "hoax" - to mould our heads in shape of that of a typical MBA.

A few do manage to shake themselves up soon after such brainwashes and get back to their original sweet world. (Many of them succum later on.) But most are carried away and the scattered paths of their lives quickly align themselves in a few popular paths. The seniors don't do it just for pleasure, although they do draw a lot of it while trying to shape views. They do, in fact, genuinely believe what they are doing is the right thing - partly because they are also victims of the same brainwashing tradition, and partly because they still haven't seen enough to learn better, coz this being a 2 year MBA, the 2nd year batch is still just aspiring for what they chose a year back and they draw their strength to keep working on the chosen path by displaying firm belief in it - by pretending and by teaching the same to others.

Another striking display of herd mentality can be seen in matters of breaking rules, even law, especially when it is not perceived as rational enough or if following it is costlier than breaking it. Or it could be a cultural phenomenon - not to follow rules, and break them in a herd so that the blame is shared and in effect is on nobody. I see that everyday on the roads in India.

One of the reasons herd mentality sets in so easily in choices people make may be lack of reliable information and insecurity in common people, due to which they rely on social channels for forming opinions and choose seemingly less risky, well-tried and tested alternatives. Secondly, while our societies and families do play the good role of providing a check and acceptance/rejection for everything we want to do, they also, in the process, instil in our minds a lot of doubts and fears. And we end up training ourselves not to apply our minds but to flow with the tide. It may not be conscious, but that's one of the cases where nurture tries to overcome nature. It doesn't always succeed, of course. And thirdly, it could be purely a cultural phenomenon, like the case of violation of traffic rules in India.

kuch to timepass comparison

Every bald man alive and dead has seen a moment when he came to know the schocking reality that he is on the road to baldness and has already covered half the distance without knowing and with the belief that he can't ever get bald. He still covers half of the remaining distance keeping himself in denial and covering bald patches with smart comb-work, which the world knows and notices, yet doesn't comment or does so with suppressed smiles and mildly sympathetic ayyayyos. This is the Sachin Tendulkar phase of baldness. And finally when the man decides he can't deny it any more and lets his strands loose, he realizes the world doesn't care and it knew all along of the barren islands which never erupt.

This sounds like the lifecycle of a bollywood star, especially a heroine, once in huge demand for her youth and beauty, and later thrown into oblivion once the first signs of aging appeared and Olay didn't help. Or a sports star who can no longer play well enough. Although the important difference is that a baldy was never paid for his hair while a heroine earned money for her beauty (and the sports guy for his ability to play the game well), I think the emotional states of both are still quite similar, particularly in the Sachin Tendulkar phase. And I guess the parallels end right there. Post that phase, a bald man usually regains confidence and does well with his life and work. But bollywood or sports celebrities go one of two routes - (1) get more and more frustrated sine die and finally die, i.e., enter a Rajesh Khanna phase, or (2) make a new beginning in a new avatar and create new goals with a new zeal, i.e., enter an Amitabh Bacchan phase. The main reason the parallels end is that for a bollywood or sports celebrity the cause of frustration was also work-related. For a baldy, it was only an appearance issue, and his appearance never earned him any money. I guess the differences are more obvious than the similarities, and I won't write more on this lame comparison :)

Manmohan Singh Robot! Let's build a smarter PM!

What would you do if someone calls you an idiot? Or inefficient? Or Incapable? Or dumb? Or helpless? Especially when you were once one heck of a Sheldon! It has happened to me many times, especially when I am new in any job, as I have the habit of getting into new jobs with no similarity to any I did before. But with Manmohan Singh, it has happened after he's finished 8 years as Prime Minister, and let's not forget the successful stint before as Finance Minister. Not that it hasn't been said before about him, but we hear it more often now with our PM's situation worsening with each passing day and his alleged direct involvement (possibly by accident and without his own knowledge) in scams. I say it's worsening coz as everything moves in its natural course in whatever direction, our PM is standing still. I sometimes feel he might be a robot with an external human appearance. He doesn't even wave his hands when he walks, although he walks real fast when the key is wound. We can easily build one of those I guess, by taking some money out of some coal mine auction, or have the mine run over by elephants (someone told me when I was a kid that if 1000 elephants run over coal, it becomes diamond), taking some time out of DRDO or ISRO or something and have our Scientists build something like that, of course without Pakistan coming to know. I was thinking whether we can have something like that - Build a Manmohan Singh Robot that walks like him with one hand in pocket, wears same dress always, doesn't talk - for Techfest Robotics Challenge, but I am not sure if doing it in public would be in the National Interest, as guys from Pakistan and guys/gals from Sri Lanka also participate in those competitions. But if someone can confirm that our PM is not a robot, then may be we can have this kind of a competition. I don't think this would be seen as offensive, coz celebrities happily take pics standing next to their own wax statues. This would be a high-tech robot. We should have the PM judge the event. If he can't decide, we can have a walking race with the PM as the decider, unless Sonia ji recommends some robot be declared the winner. She might pick up one of the robots for the next PM. But since Manmohan Singh is officially aging, she should rather have a Rahul Robot built for the next time Congress comes to power.

 

The context of this post, is of course the article - India's 'silent' prime minister becomes a tragic figure - by Simon Denyer of The Washington Post. I have realized that it is very dangerous to let yourself be ruled by a geek. Reputations of honesty, sincerity and meticoulsness to detail drawn from performance in homework, exams and research often have no relevance when it comes to getting things moving in practice. Blame it on academic stuff that has no right to be so interesting - which it happens to be for humans wired in certain way - in spite of being disconnected from reality. Blame it also on the way we form opinions of goodness about geek people, which may be true in some cases, but lead us to make conclusions that are justified only by our fear and distrust of people in power. A silent, expressionless face may mean an intelligent, possibly (or necessarily?) confused, mind lost in analysis which we correlate spontaneously to honesty and sincerity (relationships made in heaven which need not have earthly rationale), and thereafter jump and decide that such people becoming our leaders would be great. While we possibly think a weak, intelligent and honest person would let us have fun and also do what's right for us (ah, the kid in each one of us!), the powerful and chaaloo (like Sonia Gandhi) want such a person to be at the forefront to make us credulous masses happy, and also to push the puppet the way he/she likes. It's fun for all. Win-Win is a way of looking at it. But an intransitive "win" is empty by definition, unless you are a Buddha and can't define in words what he's won.