4/5, only missed Mullins. Lindor fidgeted, and then arched and straightened his back in a way that I do when I'm steeling myself for an unpleasant task. Puk looked to the sky - like you would when you're trying to think of the answer to a question. Gattis and McCarthy also look like they breathed deep and steeled themselves, although Gattis looks more amped than nervous to me
I wonder though how much of this is directing? The camera is going to linger on a player in a different way during a dramatic moment than a banal one.
It's true that in general the directing is different in high-leverage moments, but I tried to find identical or very similar shots for each player pairing, to minimize that variable
I was 0 for 5!! But to give myself some small amount of credit, I think was actually picking up on the tell, but just inverting what that tell meant. The "non-nervous" clips all have these kind of loose, almost exaggerated movements, which I think I interpreted as nervous energy or something. But on a second look (after knowing the answers), in the "nervous" clips the movements and mannerisms are mostly still there, just much "tighter" and less exaggerated.
It's almost like the players are unconsciously "performing" anxiety in the normal situations ("I'm playing professional baseball, people think it's a big deal, so I'll go through all these mannerisms and things to make it seem like yeah, it is a big deal!") and then in the tense situations some of that gets stripped away and they're really just focusing on their jobs in this different, higher stakes situation - I think the difference is clearest in the McCarthy clips.
My armchair psychologizing is probably way off base, but fun article nonetheless!
I got 3/5. Even if I had gotten 0/5, this would still be my new favorite baseball game - thanks, Sam! I was also really impressed that it looked like even the same umpire in the two Lindor clips (or at least it sure looked like the same number on the ump's sleeve).
I got 2 for 5. Got Lindor so was excited I was good at this. Then I got the next 3 wrong before getting McCarthy right. So - worse than flipping a coin...
got the middle three right and the first and last wrong. i did feel like i was overly reliant on context clues - the lighting, the behavior of the few fans we could see, the next batter coming to the plate, the tiny corner of the scorebug.
A thing I believe about MLB players (and high level athletes in general) is that they usually have supreme self belief and confidence compared to normal people. So in a couple of these I thought maybe the correct one was the one where they looked MORE confident. But look where that strategy got me.
I failed: 1/4. My first thought is that I was keyed on the wrong thing: the tell is not nervous energy but intentionally suppressed nervousness. My second thought is that I don't know these guys well enough to know their individual tells. My third thought is that there is legitimately no difference and that a sufficiently large sample would demonstrate that. Professional athletes are competition monsters largely immune to nerves as we understand them.
Two sets of results that came in by email:
Reader J went 0 for 5.
Reader D went 2 for 5, getting Puk and Mullins correct
(For the batters) these are the guys who succeeded under pressure - wouldn't you believe that they weren't so nervous?
That was one outcome I was open to, yes!
4/5, only missed Mullins. Lindor fidgeted, and then arched and straightened his back in a way that I do when I'm steeling myself for an unpleasant task. Puk looked to the sky - like you would when you're trying to think of the answer to a question. Gattis and McCarthy also look like they breathed deep and steeled themselves, although Gattis looks more amped than nervous to me
I wonder though how much of this is directing? The camera is going to linger on a player in a different way during a dramatic moment than a banal one.
It's true that in general the directing is different in high-leverage moments, but I tried to find identical or very similar shots for each player pairing, to minimize that variable
1/5 only got mullins
I was 0 for 5!! But to give myself some small amount of credit, I think was actually picking up on the tell, but just inverting what that tell meant. The "non-nervous" clips all have these kind of loose, almost exaggerated movements, which I think I interpreted as nervous energy or something. But on a second look (after knowing the answers), in the "nervous" clips the movements and mannerisms are mostly still there, just much "tighter" and less exaggerated.
It's almost like the players are unconsciously "performing" anxiety in the normal situations ("I'm playing professional baseball, people think it's a big deal, so I'll go through all these mannerisms and things to make it seem like yeah, it is a big deal!") and then in the tense situations some of that gets stripped away and they're really just focusing on their jobs in this different, higher stakes situation - I think the difference is clearest in the McCarthy clips.
My armchair psychologizing is probably way off base, but fun article nonetheless!
For the purposes of answering whether there is a signal in these, going 0 for 5 is as telling as going 5 for 5
4/5 😊 I passed!
I'm two weeks late on this, but I wonder if a professional poker player would ace this test.
4/5, not sure if any of this is signal or noise, but here's what drove my guesses:
Lindor had the fidget with his helmet
Puk had the shoulder sag
Mullens did the little arm shake
(got Gaddis wrong)
McCarthy took two last quick glances up at the field - he's the one who I'd say *actually* looked nervous
I only got Gaddis and McCarthy, but I was definitely the most confident about those two
I got 3/5. Even if I had gotten 0/5, this would still be my new favorite baseball game - thanks, Sam! I was also really impressed that it looked like even the same umpire in the two Lindor clips (or at least it sure looked like the same number on the ump's sleeve).
0/5
Woof. I'm already not good at reading facial emotions, but I really thought that Gaddis one was clear cut.
I got 2 for 5. Got Lindor so was excited I was good at this. Then I got the next 3 wrong before getting McCarthy right. So - worse than flipping a coin...
got the middle three right and the first and last wrong. i did feel like i was overly reliant on context clues - the lighting, the behavior of the few fans we could see, the next batter coming to the plate, the tiny corner of the scorebug.
1/5, only got Gaddis.
A thing I believe about MLB players (and high level athletes in general) is that they usually have supreme self belief and confidence compared to normal people. So in a couple of these I thought maybe the correct one was the one where they looked MORE confident. But look where that strategy got me.
1/5. I got Lindor and missed the rest. And like Sam said in a comment, I thought they all looked uncomfortable in all of them.
I failed: 1/4. My first thought is that I was keyed on the wrong thing: the tell is not nervous energy but intentionally suppressed nervousness. My second thought is that I don't know these guys well enough to know their individual tells. My third thought is that there is legitimately no difference and that a sufficiently large sample would demonstrate that. Professional athletes are competition monsters largely immune to nerves as we understand them.
Funnily enough, I thought the challenge would be not that they are immune to nerves but that (to me) they look uncomfortable in all of them!
If you stay nervous you don’t have to get nervous!