I am sure Yogi Berra wouldn't agree but the verb "to podium" is a neologism I want to help root out and destroy.

I sometimes wish we had our winning athletes stand on herms, not a podium. At least the herms are decorated (usually, now chiselled off)

I do realize english is a fluid language and adapts to suit it's needs. I do not believe in appeals to dictionary authorities, I just don't LIKE "to podium" as a verb

Verbing weirds language, but for some reason it also funs language.

(j/k)

It's particularly common in the balling arena. Sporting appears to verbalise like nobody else can. They probably medal in it.

ok, enough, enough, I admit it - I hateses it.

You're hateful towards it?

Personally I'd probably interpret "to medal" as "to meddle" and misunderstand completely.

its needs

But if an amoeba pretended to win the Olympics, would they pseudopodium ?

In the amoeba Games, they keep a watchful eye on the winners during the anthems, lest they wind up with a single very large medalist, after phagocytosis.

(I remember someone —Lambert Meertens?— trying very hard to come up with non-applicable "pure" mathematics word problem involving how to best arrange an ameboid tournament, but of course it was all just a thin disguise —mathematical Groucho Marx glasses!— on top of a very lucrative applied problem: optimal reduction of an operator tree into an accumulator)

I'd settle for TFA using `who`/`whom` properly :)

I don’t understand your comment. What are actions?

The fact that a champion does rather than holds back or tries to execute complex plans, is the point. They don't overthink - they just go in and give it 100%.

Sounds also like the description of an attacking bull to me.

The key is, though, that they do the right thing, and are also willing and able to abort or change plans (again, in the right direction) when the situation changes.

> What are actions?

Tactics; ways to attack.

(probably an unspoken assumption is that the two actions taught would both start in the same way, so one launches the attack, sees which* line gets closed, and continues in the line which has been opened. Even if you don't have the speed to properly determine the open line for the continuation, it's still possible to successfully run the pair as a mixed strategy and expect to find an opening stochastically)

* the same coach believes the most beautiful action is "feint direct, direct": at first you pretend to straightforwardly touch, but should your opponent fail to defend (because they're expecting a more complex action and are waiting to see where you're really going to attack), you go ahead and turn the "feint" into a real score.

> "Real artists ship." —SPJ

Many of the most prolific artists of all time are now forgotten by the masses. The choice of "artist" is particularly perplexing here because the implied sentiment seems to apply primarily to industry and not to artists.

But all the artists that never completed a work because they always thought "it's not perfect yet" are forgotten, by everyone.

Yet there are plenty of one hit wonders that are remembered.

Tolkien being an example.

That’s two hits: the Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Also several academic pieces in his professional field. Not including the material subsequently published by his son and estate.

And The Lord of Rings was first published as separated books.

Back in the day, it only took one hit, and after that one could drive off of Skyline Blvd in a sports car, or retire to a horse farm, or run a SF nightclub, etc.

see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34566920

Thats not true. Several artist never shipped or published any works, but are still well known today. Vivian Maier and Henry Darger comes to mind.

Agree. In addition, there are also plenty of artists who either shipped yet died poor (van Gogh, for example) or who were prolific proposers/thinkers/sketchers with "low actual ship rate" (Leonardo never built his helicopter, yet "dreamed in drawing" about it a lot).

Measuring the "influence" of an artist my "number of artworks created and sold" is a bit like measuring academics by "number of papers published". It's at best a very coarse approximation of "the real thing". At worst, total bull.

A clear counter example would be someone like Franz Kafka. He hid much of his works in his lifetime, and willed for them to be destroyed posthumously whether published or unpublished.

That anything came down from him was the executors of his will ignoring his stated intent.

And yet he's considered a literary Great of the 20st century.

Sometimes, legacy is that what others did.

> I once heard a coach claim that given a student with the heart of a champion, they'd podium after having been taught but two actions.

Out of curiosity, for which sport?

fencing (specifically épée, but I find the principle valid for just about any direct competition, including team sports)