text:
Talk:International Association of Scientologists

Controversial POV Check
An "attempt to address pov problem" by 68.164.133.174 is given on 20 Mar 2005 (3:02). The attempt consisted of minor editing which vandalized previous contribution:
 * * The IAS' stated purpose to forward the Aims of Scientology was censored and replaced with to "contribute to religious freedom."  (Quotes as used in this way portray that the IAS does not contribute to religious freedom.  It is simply untrue and a subtle glittering of generalities.)
 * * Also, a ==Membership== section has been removed and weaseled with more glittering of generalities.
 * * A critical link was added, pointing to Andreas Heldal-Lund's website which references one too many forgeries and other propaganda websites.  Anyway, this article (International Association of Scientologists) is not about Scientology.

IMHO, this type of "contribution" by 68.164.133.174 is sneaky vandalism and propaganda under the guise of POV. A bandwagon which Antaeus has joined by stating "Rephrase to reduce endorsement of POV" as the reason for his revision on 20 Mar 2005 (16:28) in which he chang "Recognizing the"... to "Believing in a" and also reverted my previously explained change. Exactly how does all this reduce endorsement of POV?--J.Tell 06:21, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Very simple. One of the goals of WP:NPOV is to describe disputes and the beliefs held by the various sides of the disputes without taking sides.  If I saw an article on an organization of Scientology critics and read a sentence that started "Recognizing the danger posed by the criminal organization Scientology" I would edit it to "Believing in a danger posed by Scientology", because leaving "recognizing" in would suggest that Wikipedia agrees with, "endorses", the beliefs it is describing.  For the same reason, when I read in this article a sentence beginning with "Recognizing the need for a", I changed it to "Believing in the need for a", because leaving "recognizing" in would again suggest that Wikipedia endorses the beliefs it is describing. -- Antaeus Feldspar 12:51, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Fair enough. But, you didn't mention the rest of the issues I brought up, some of which pertain to the revision you just made.--J.Tell 22:29, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Propaganda
Antaeus, Wikipedia is not a soapbox for Andreas Heldal-Lund.

Wikipedia is not a soapbox

Wikipedia articles are not:
 * 1) Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views.

The link you insist on "contributing" is a propaganda website maintained by Andreas and should have no place within Wikipedia except on the article about Andreas Heldal-Lund and perhaps propaganda.--J.Tell 19:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, it's certainly your opinion that Operation Clambake is a propaganda website. However, that is not enough reason to remove any mention of it in the name of reporting objectively. -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:32, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * * 1. It is not my opinion that Operation Clambake is a propaganda site. Determination of propaganda is not based on opinion. Anyone who is familiar with propaganda techniques that studies Andreas' site will tell you that it is loaded with propaganda. * 2. Andreas admits his website is not objective. What makes you think referencing an unobjective propaganda site is reporting objectively.--J.Tell 00:12, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Ah, so it is then your opinion that no Wikipedia article should link to any site which is non-neutral and therefore "propaganda"? Interesting opinion.  But not convincing. -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:28, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Operation Clambake is biased and propaganda. Can't you find a more objective website?  Or is it your intentional to forward propaganda?--J.Tell 21:37, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Why don't we turn it around? Why don't you name me a site that is openly and solidly critical of Scientology that you would not dismiss as propaganda?  If you are actually trying to judge Operation: Clambake on its merits when you called it biased propaganda, you shouldn't have too much trouble showing a critic site that is not, for contrast.  Of course, if you're speaking as a non-squirreling Scientologist, you might have trouble, since such Scientologists are required to believe (because Source said it was so) that there is no such thing as an honest critic, or even a non-evil critic, since every critic was by definition (Hubbard's definition, of course!) an SP who hates humanity and wants to keep Scientology from saving the world.  So if your only basis for calling the site "biased propaganda" is that it's an article of religious faith that it must be, pardon me if I don't find that very convincing. -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:14, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

 * You are incorrect on many things in your statement. First of all my basis for calling the site biased and propaganda are obvious to anyone intelligent who looks into the site objectively. Just because you cannot see past the biased and unobjective website of Andreas Heldal-Lund does not justify your inability to objectively criticize the International Association of Scientologists. Study propaganda for a while and then get back to me.
 * You didn't answer the question: Why don't you name a site that is openly and solidly critical of Scientology that you would not dismiss as propaganda? wikipediatrix 21:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Putting aside the issue of Andreas Heldal-Lund, is there a website that is critical of Scientology that User:J.Tell feels is fair and non-propagandistic? That would be a help. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:09, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

 * Perhaps Antaeus knows of other references that are fair and non-propagandistic.--J.Tell 05:00, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Willmcw, I am disappointed in you. For lack of another website, you must resort to propaganda.--J.Tell 04:39, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Willmcw, why did you restore the message that I retracted because I realized you were not the one "resorting" to propaganda? That seems like a pretty sneaky action if you ask me. I am not embarrassed of my statements, but I realized I was wrong so I changed my message.--J.Tell 02:55, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry to disappoint. It doesn't look like propaganda to me and you haven't pointed to anything on that site to support your contention. You've been asked to provide a site that you prefer, and apparently there is none. You can't expect us to omit a resource simply because you disapprove of it, especially if it is the main source of criticism of the article's subject. -Willmcw 05:01, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

"It doesn't look like propaganda to me"-Willmcw, May 11, 2005

 * Allow me: See below--J.Tell 02:14, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

J.Tell's deliberate misquoting of Antaeus Feldspar
"When your goal is to act in an ethical and moral manner, your first and foremost enemy is always yourself."--Antaeus FeldsparAntaeus Feldspar is using Wikipedia to forward Andreas Heldal-Lund's propaganda website. Please see What Wikipedia is not, specifically the section about propaganda or advocacy of any kind.IMHO, actions that forward or directly use propaganda reflect either ignorance or a deep seated POV.--J.Tell 20:56, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

 * J.Tell, please cure yourself of the mistaken notion that you can successfully deflect attention from the issues by making personal attacks like this on other editors. Secondly, I'm glad you did this, because it allows me to show what bad faith you are acting in.  Here is the context in which you found that quote on my user page (which, by the way, you do not have my permission to edit):

 * I used to believe (and tell others that I believed) that "When your goal is to act in an ethical and moral manner, your first and foremost enemy is always yourself."

 * I now know I was wrong. If you have the basic desire to act ethically in the first place, then you have to take second place in line to a whole lot of other people out there who can do a lot better of a job twisting your good intentions into bad deeds than you can.  To be hoist by one's own petard is not necessarily the easiest or most common way to go, only the one with the most irony.

 * I for one find it absolutely fascinating that you choose to reproduce a quote verbatim but not to include the salient information that I now consider that quote wrong. -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:01, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

 * This discussion about your quote and scrutinizing my choice to quote you is a "deflection" of attention from the issue: propaganda being used as reference and often as source material for composing Wikipedia articles. This is not my opinion, it is a fact.  One who understands propaganda can easily prove that Andreas' site is full of propaganda.  Also, his site references false documents and forgeries.  The fact that you reference this website but not many other critical and objective sites suggests that you are using Wikipedia to forward propaganda.  Why not reference the many other sites that are objectively critical?  You seem to be POV towards critics so you should have no trouble digging up the references.--J.Tell 04:57, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Operation Clambake
In the article Operation Clambake presents: What is Scientology?, numerous types of propaganda are being employed: appeal to fear, appeal to authority, demonization, glittering generality, obtaining disapproval, oversimplification, testimonial and damaging quotation, use of virtue words, slogans. SeePropaganda. Besides all that, Operation Clambake has very little credibility: Andreas has not corrected his website despite many arguments and discussion people have had about the innacuracies of his statements. Is this the the kind of sources and references Wikipedia wants?--J.Tell 02:48, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

 * How could anyone look at the operation clambake site and not know immediately, the site is established with one goal in mind. To belittle and work toward destruction.  Isn't it obvious?  I would bet a dollar it is supported by Psychology / Psychiatry somehow.  Its obvious message is, "I am an enemy of Scientology" Terryeo 07:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Questions about recent reverts/POV issue
AI, once again I find your actions cryptic and confusing, and request clarification. You've reverted my last edits, then restored some of my edits, declaring something to the effect that "we've discussed this change already." Huh? My questions: What is it about the current version that seems to have a neutrality problem? What would you like to change to make it more neutral? And why do you think we need multiple links to the same IAS web site? (Two of the links are basically useless, in any case: one to a "privacy" page, another begins at number 7. in a longer list. Really, the main link is all anyone needs.  Imagine if your multi-link policy was applied throughout Wikipedia!) BTfromLA 3 July 2005 06:29 (UTC)

 * BT, If you are confused, then look around and find out where you are. If my actions are cryptic, then describe my actions. Thank you for a more neutral revert.--AI 3 July 2005 08:04 (UTC)

 * 1) I see no problem with having only a main link to the IAS site.
 * 2) About the purpose of the IAS, regardless of how much time has gone by, I see that the issue raised about this was never addressed by Antaeus or BT or anyone else under .--AI 3 July 2005 08:04 (UTC)

 * It looks to me as if the complaint was that the line about the IAS furthering "the aims of Scientology" had been cut. But that phrase is in all the versions that I've proposed, quoted directly from the IAS web page.  Am I missing something? BTfromLA 3 July 2005 08:34 (UTC)

 * Thank you.--AI 3 July 2005 09:07 (UTC)

 * Actually, yes, it was addressed, under the general principle of "Wikipedia can describe the beliefs held by the various sides of disagreements, but should not be taking sides." To report that the IAS's stated purpose is to forward the aims of Scientology is describing the beliefs.  To report that "through their membership dues IAS members support the aims of Scientology" -- i.e., that when an IAS member pays his or her dues they're supporting "a civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights" -- that's taking sides.

 * Suppose a psychiatry-related article stated that psychiatrists are physicians who take the Hippocratic oath, which includes the promise to never deliberately do harm to anyone for anyone else's interest. Would you be comfortable with that changing to "psychiatrists, as physicians who have taken the Hippocratic oath, never deliberately do harm to anyone for anyone else's interest"?  If not, then now you understand why quoting the IAS on what they claim their purpose to be, and stating that it is their purpose and it's what members support with their dues, are two entirely different things. -- Antaeus Feldspar 3 July 2005 22:05 (UTC)

support aims or activities?
A recent edit changed the phrase about what the IAS dues support--instead of the activities of Scientology to the aims of Scientology. This seems like an error to me--money doesn't fund "aims," which are abstractions, it funds actions. Any objection if I revert to the earlier version? BTfromLA 3 July 2005 18:09 (UTC)

 * No objection at all. -- Antaeus Feldspar 3 July 2005 22:44 (UTC)

Reference
Incorrect information. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubbard_Association_of_Scientologists_International and http://www.iasmembership.org/en_US/story/index.html as to the facts on the formation of the IAS. Deletions have no reliable source and are skewed. (Streamlight 6 January 2006 4:44 GMT

You vandalized this article with false information and pr fluff from the "official" site. knock it off.--Fahrenheit451 01:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Corrections have been made to inaccuracies per http://www.iasmembership.org/en_US/story/index.html and http://www.rtc.org. I have done my homework. The parts I have deleted have no reliable source. Editors should at least try to be somewhat factual. Removed a link that has no specific connection with the specific subject of this page or its content – seem to be just a general negative affect to the Scientologists.Streamlight 17:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I have done my homework as well. Please knock off your POV "reliable source" editing.--Fahrenheit451 00:48, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It is rather important to present a POV. Several editors keep insisting that every word of an article be Neutral, well, that is simply a misunderstanding of the policy, WP:NPOV. Especially in a controversial area a POV must be present, if it were not, the subject would not exist in the first place.  While Clambake would refuse to present the subject as it exists, it is Wikipedia's goal to present what is known about the subject.  This means presenting the POV which created the subject. After a subject is actually introduced, after a reader can understand and know what it is, then its controversy can be presented.  To do otherwise would be to copy Clambake and Xenu and expose' news reporting and would not be Wikipedic. Terryeo 04:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Fahrenheit451, if you say the facts I am supplying are incorrect, then please supply some reliable source – please do not just nuke my edits out of hand. I am correcting information that is false and my source for this is the IAS’s site itself. http://www.iasmembership.org/story/index.html Streamlight 09:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

That IAS website page is some POV pr for sure. Lots of omitted data, lots of opinion. It's a pr site.--Fahrenheit451 10:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Antaeus Feldspar – I have changed this numerous times to put in factual information. This has nothing to do with anyone’s POV. This is an encyclopedia and data should be accurate, not unverified and false. Streamlight 11:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Gloria Streamlight, again, I ask that you cease and desist from vandalism. Removal of the wikilinks is a clear case of vandalizing an article. --Fahrenheit451 17:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Fahrenheit451 – please check the definition of vandalism. It is perfectly within my rights to correct false information. You have not provided any reliable source that gives you reason to keep changing this; accusations of vandalism are not going to change the facts. Streamlight 11:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Streamlight, so where does the IAS claim that it is incorporated? Please provide that reference.--Fahrenheit451 23:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Notification of repeated vandalism
An unregistered user with the ip address templates of 216.175.xx.xx has repeatedly vandalized this article by POV deletions along the pr lines of the church of scientology. Any further deletions by this user or users, without following wikipedia policy on discussion, will be reverted by myself.--Fahrenheit451 00:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Press mentions of International Association of Scientologists
Added here to be sifted to see if any of them would be useful in the article.

That Cruise video from the 2004 IAS meeting might be a notable mention... :) AndroidCat (talk) 03:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

New page
I wrote a new page for the IAS. I think the only thing I saved from the earlier version (pre-redirect) was the categories. The page could use a logo. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 12:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)


text:
Doug Heffernan

Douglas Steven "Doug" Heffernan is a fictional character and the protagonist of the American sitcom The King of Queens. The character has also appeared in Everybody Loves Raymond, Becker, and Cosby. He is portrayed by Kevin James, whose stand-up comedy background inspired the comedic style of the show. Doug, an often immature 'average Joe', lives in Rego Park, Queens, with his wife Carrie Heffernan (Leah Remini) and his father-in-law Arthur Spooner (Jerry Stiller).

Doug is a delivery driver for the International Parcel Service (a fictionalized version of United Parcel Service), a job he acquired by pretending to work there after lying to Carrie (his then-girlfriend) about having a job.

Character Background
Doug was born on February 9, 1965, in Montreal, while his mother Janet (Jenny O'Hara) and father Joe (Dakin Matthews) were attending a friend's wedding there. His parents told him that he was born in New York City and he discovers the truth as an adult, in the episode "Dog Shelter". He has a sister, a physical education teacher named Stephanie (Ricki Lake).

Doug's father owned a small hardware store in Queens, and his mother was a homemaker. The Heffernans were Catholic, but Doug lapses after moving out. He lived with his parents until he was 27, when he moved into his friend Richie's apartment. Doug's father, Joe, wanted Doug to take over the hardware store when he came of age, but Doug showed little interest in this venture.

He was an overweight child and was sent to "fat camp" by his parents. Doug's weight is frequently a point of contention between himself and his wife, with Carrie encouraging him to eat healthier, but Doug is steadfast in his enjoyment of fried foods and snacks. Carrie's domineering personality is another frequent subject of argument, with Doug secretly defying her demands (about clothing and cologne, for example).

Doug is an avid sports fan, supporting the New York Mets, New York Jets, New York Knicks, and New York Islanders. He proposes to Carrie at a Jets game. On Christmas one year, when he is given a Miami Dolphins Christmas ornament, Doug openly doesn't like the gift because both the Jets and Dolphins play in the AFC East. (Despite the Jets-Patriots rivalry becoming more intense during the show's run than the Dolphins-Jets rivalry, it was never mentioned on the show; however, the Monday Night Miracle did take place during the show's third season.) James is a fan of the Mets in real life; he named his daughter Shea Joelle after the then-home of the Mets, Shea Stadium.

Doug attended St. Gregory's High School in Queens, where he befriended Spence Olchin; he also went to school with his cousin Danny. Doug played high school football was a star player and starting fullback. He was very popular in school and thinks of high school as the best years of his life. Doug never liked bullies in high school, unlike the other jocks, which also made him well-liked. In the episode "Hi, School", Doug says to Carrie during an argument, "Oh, I see what's going on; you're mad because I rocked in high school and you didn't." Carrie was an unpleasant and rebellious teenager in high school, while Doug would often avoid schoolwork and try hard to be liked in high school. After graduation, he went to Nassau Community College on Long Island, but dropped out after eight days. He tried out for the Nassau County Rebels, a semi-professional football team, but ultimately quit.

He later acquired a job as a bouncer at a bar. Around this time, his friend Richie, a firefighter for the New York City Fire Department, introduced him to his future wife, Carrie Spooner. While dating Carrie, Doug inadvertently landed his final and longest-standing job as a truck driver for the fictional International Parcel Service (IPS).

Doug's trademark phrase is "Shutty!" as a means of telling people to "shut up."

Marriage
Early in the show, it is referenced that Doug and Carrie have known each other since junior high. That story was retconned, and the new plot is that Doug and his friend Richie met Carrie at a club, then went on a double date that did not go well, until the end. Doug first meets Carrie's father, Arthur (Jerry Stiller), at a Thanksgiving dinner that went wrong. Doug is nearly scared away by Arthur, who disapproves of the relationship, but later in this episode, he and Carrie declare their love for one another.

Doug and Carrie got engaged at a Jets game and married in 1995, before the start of the series. Initially, they live with Arthur while searching for a house. After they find a house, Arthur's wife dies, his home burns down, and he is forced to move in with them.

In Season 6, the couple decides to renew their vows. The idea came up during a dinner date, where Doug is inspired to declare his love to his wife. Carrie is touched by this and suggests that they should renew their vows. However, the couple's initial enthusiasm for renewing their vows quickly dwindles. Planning the wedding becomes much more troublesome than they expected. Through mutual agreement, they call off the wedding and called their friends and relatives to let them know of the cancellation; Doug's mother worries about problems in her son's marriage. Doug and Carrie's frustrations grow as rumours of their marriage complications spread. Ultimately, they decide that the ceremony will go ahead, and despite further issues, (finding it difficult to get a chimp to serve as Doug's best man), Doug and Carrie renew their wedding vows.

At the end of the series, Doug and Carrie adopt a baby girl from China. On the same day, Carrie realizes that she is pregnant.

Friends
Doug's best friend is fellow IPS driver Deacon Palmer (Victor Williams), who is married to Kelly (Merrin Dungey), Carrie's best friend. His other friends include his lifelong friend and subway booth worker Spence Olchin (Patton Oswalt), a firefighter named Richie Ianucchi (Larry Romano), his cousin Danny (Gary Valentine), dog walker Holly (Nicole Sullivan), and next-door neighbour and bodybuilder Lou Ferrigno (playing himself). Another friend of Doug's, Ray Barone (Ray Romano), appears as a guest on several episodes of the show; Doug has also appeared on several episodes of Romano's show, Everybody Loves Raymond, as well as other New York-based CBS shows such as Cosby and Becker.

After King of Queens
In 2016, Doug resurfaced in several television spots for a new CBS sitcom starring Kevin James called Kevin Can Wait. In these ads, he meets up with James and they have a short banter about the upcoming sitcom. In one ad, he suggests portraying a next-door neighbor to James' new character. In another, while watching television and bringing up the fact that King of Queens is currently in reruns, he tempts James (who is about to eat a plate of carrot sticks) with a large bucket of fried chicken, which the actor eats.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Doug Heffernan


text:
Talk:Atléticos de San Germán

Untitled
What is Ortiz's full name so we can wikilink it. When did he go to Europe (it only says 'soon'). RJFJR 17:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

His full name is Jose "Piculin" Ortiz

title: Talk:Atléticos de San Germán


text: Category:English cellists

title: Category:English cellists


text:
Talk:Adrian Mole and the Weapons of Mass Destruction

A note from the starting author of this article
This article is not complete as written. I will expand it into a quite comprehensive article when I have the time. Rest assured - I'll use spoiler warning labels:D. Revisions are welcome from anyone else who has read this book. ChrisJMoor

Why has the page been moved, Petaholmes?--ChrisJMoor 02:16, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Has Sue Townsend ever explained why Adrian's sister Rosie is not once mentioned in this book?

Have lent my copy to a friend but I'm quite certain she is mentioned and indeed, talks over the phone. She is at university and living with a drug addicted boyfriend (who stole money from a charity box in the union bar, apparently). She pesters Adrian for forty pounds to buy a 'printer' so she can hand in her thesis (obviously intended to get boyfriend out of trouble). --ChrisJMoor 16:45, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

She tells Adrian that the £200 (not £40) is I'd for Simon's crack dealer who is threatening to break his legs. Adrian says he doesn't have the money so she asks Pauline for the money- telling her it's for a printer rather than telling the truth.

As for the lack of mentions in the book there could be two reasons- 1) Mrs Townsend forgot to add her in after the first third of the book or 2) compared to Adriana issues in the latter half of the book her problems are minor by comparison.

Personally, I have always felt that she never had a story line that was well integrated with Adrian's; apart from the termination in the Cappacino Years where she went to Adrian for help and he actually helped (by getting her the realistic training baby she banned Ashby and then supporting her through the process). A lot of her story lines appear talked" as a distraction for our pedantic hero, certainly he doesn't relate to her nor are they close. Apart from the above there are no moments of tenderness our heartfelt conversations such as the times his parents come through, eventually, when he is about to hit rock bottom. Stefanzi (talk) 12:03, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Plot Summary Section Does Not, In Fact, Contain A Plot Summary
I find this really amusing for some reason; it discusses the summary, but one is not present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.76.44 (talk) 21:43, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

It sure doesn't. It appears that the introduction carries on past the Plot Summary heading... Really strange. Dare I write one from scratch? Instead of correcting typos and grammar should I right a while summary from scratch? Jesus, nor I feel like Adrian; noting some minor errors and thinking I am doing something worthwhile and avoiding actually creating something new, Eden something that is needed. Here I a.m. though, writing to too much about how I should be writing something else...

Aaaaaadriiiiiaaaaannnnn! Stefanzi (talk) 12:10, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Ouch, Adrian Mole would not have let Swype screw up three times and then not correct them. At least he gets his spelling correct.

Eden = even a.m. = am nor = now Stefanzi (talk) 12:12, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


text:
Handicapping

Handicapping, in sport and games, is the practice of assigning advantage through scoring compensation or other advantage given to different contestants to equalize the chances of winning. The word also applies to the various methods by which the advantage is calculated. In principle, a more experienced participant is disadvantaged, or a less experienced or capable participant is advantaged, in order to make it possible for the less experienced participant to win whilst maintaining fairness. Handicapping is used in scoring many games and competitive sports, including go, shogi, chess, croquet, golf, bowling, polo, basketball, and track and field events. Handicap races are common in clubs which encourage all levels of participants, such as swimming or in cycling clubs and sailing clubs, or which allow participants with a variety of standards of equipment. Often races, contests or tournaments where this practice is competitively employed are known as Handicaps.

Handicapping also refers to the various methods by which spectators can predict and quantify the results of a sporting match. The term is applied to the practice of predicting the result of a competition, such as for purposes of betting against the point spread. A favored team that wins by less than the point spread still wins the game, but bets on that team lose.

In either case the handicapper is the person who sets the handicaps for the activity.

Etymology
The term handicap derives from hand-in-cap, referring to a system wherein players placed bets or money into the cap of a neutral arbiter to reach an agreement as to the relative values of items sought to be traded.

Competition handicapping
In a 'result adjustment' style handicap event, the outcome may be adjusted by some factor determined by the handicap. Some forms of car or yacht racing. In this case, the winner, on elapsed time, may differ from the fastest competitor when the times have been adjusted for the different competitors' handicaps.

In a 'pursuit' style handicap race, all participants are clocked in a time trial before the race. When this takes place at the same event as the main race, it is known as the handicap. In the race itself, the participants do not all start at the same "Go"; the starts are staggered, based on the handicaps. The slowest swimmer, or cyclist, for example, starts first and the fastest starts last, making the end of the race (hopefully) close. An ideal handicap race is one in which all participants finish at the same time. The winner is the person who beats his or her own time.

Similarly, physically staggered starting positions can be used, for example, in greyhound racing a handicap race is where greyhounds (based on their ability) start from different starting traps set at different measurements from the finish line, and in human foot racing, for example, the Stawell Gift.

Some motorsport events, especially in sports car racing, demand teams to stop the vehicle in the pitbox a fixed period of time depending on the drivers' classification, thus giving advantage to less skilled drivers. An example of a championship using this system is the International GT Open. The advantage of this system over ballast weight systems is that vehicles have the normal performance on track, so better drivers will be able to recover time and overtake slower drivers.

Contrarily, horse race handicapping is implemented using extra weight.

Horse racing
A handicap race in horse racing is a race in which horses carry different weights, allocated by the handicapper. A better horse will carry a heavier weight, to give him or her a disadvantage when racing against slower horses. The handicapper's goal in assigning handicap weights is to enable all the horses to finish together (in a dead heat).

The skill in betting on a handicap horse race is in determining which horse can overcome its handicap.

In addition to the Daily Racing Form, other data sources include Brisnet, Equibase, The Ragozin Sheets, and Thoro-Graph.

Rugby
In rugby, one of the teams will start with a points advantage, and one will start with a deficit to make up in the match. If a team starts with the advantage, as long as they finish above the points different covered in the handicap, then your selection will win. The points handicap will be greater due to higher point scoring nature of rugby.

Basketball
With a basketball handicap, you’ll be backing a team to start with a points advantage or deficit to make up in the match. Basketball handicapping is often seen in matches that are predicted to be one-sided.

Golf
Handicapping in the sport of golf enables players and teams of varying abilities to compete against one another. A golf handicap is a numerical measure of a golfer's potential or "average best". Better players are those with the lowest handicaps.

Chess
Types of chess handicaps include:
 * the stronger player surrenders a certain piece or pieces
 * the weaker player has extra moves at the beginning of the game
 * the weaker player has extra time on the chess clock
 * the odds-giver to deliver checkmate with a specified piece

Go
Handicapping in go includes the weaker player being given an advantage by placing a number of stones before the stronger player commences, and by final points adjustment.

Shogi
Handicapping in shogi is achieved by removing one or more pieces from the stronger player's side. Shogi (Japanese chess) and many of its variants have handicaps.

Polo
The polo handicap is an estimation of the player's worth to his or her team. It is an overall rating of a player's horsemanship, team play, knowledge of the game, strategy and horses. The difference between the total of the polo handicaps for the players on each team is then used to determine the minimum score difference for the better team to score to enable them to win.

In polo, every player is awarded an individual handicap depending on performance. Handicap commissions of the national associations meet several times a year to decide players’ handicaps.

Argentina: 0 to 10

USA: C (-2), B (-1), B+ (-0.5), A (0), A+ (0.5), 1.0, 1.5, 2 to 10

England: -2 to 10

Sailing
Handicaps for sailing vessels in sailing races have varied throughout history, and they also vary by country, and by sailing organisation. Sailing handicap standards exist internationally, nationally, and within individual sailing clubs.

Sailing race handicaps may be based on vessel capability and-or crew experience, and today typically adjust the time a vessel takes to reach the finish point of the race.

Tennis
The ATP, WTA, Challenger, and ITF events have plenty of matches which can be one-sided, which results in short odds being offered with various betting sites.

Therefore, there isn’t ever much value in backing a specific player to win, which is why handicap betting is often popular. Handicap betting in tennis often means that you’re wagering funds on a player to start a certain amount of games ahead or behind in the match.

Motorcycle speedway
The calculated match average is a handicap calculated for every motorcycle speedway rider.

Cycling
Handicapping in competitive cycling is most commonly used in track cycling and road racing in Australia and New Zealand. Handicap events are rare outside these two countries.

In track cycling, distance-based handicaps are typically used. The highest-profile example of this racing format is the Melbourne Cup on Wheels.

In road cycling, pursuit-style handicaps are most common, and are mostly restricted to grassroots amateur events. In the past, higher-profile national events such as the Melbourne to Warrnambool Classic were run as handicaps, but with larger entry numbers and a preference for scratch racing among elite-level national competitors, these are no longer run as handicaps.

Because of the importance of drafting in cycling events, riders are usually grouped into a limited number of "bunches" based on previous results, with the bunches containing the weakest riders leaving first. Prizes are typically awarded to the first finishers, first female finisher (in mixed events), and fastest time recorded (who may not have crossed the line first due to the handicapping).

Middle and arbitrage bets
There are strategies that involve differences in the lines on the same event at different books. One bet is called a "middle", which when a player finds two books that offer different point spreads for the same event. They will bet the more favorable spread at both books, and if the final score falls between the two, the bettor will win both bets. On the other hand, if the total falls outside the range of the "middle" the bettor only loses a small percentage of a bet (the "juice" or "vig" taken by the house).

For example, Book 1 has Team A as a 3-point favorite, and Book 2 has team B as a 3-point favorite. If a player bets Team B at Book 1, and Team A at Book 2, he will win both bets if either side wins by 2 or less points, and will win one bet and lose the other (known as a "side") if either team wins by 3 points.

Another strategy, known as arbitrage, or an "arb" or "scalp", involves finding different moneylines for the same event. In this case, the bettor will bet the more favorable line at both books, and have a guaranteed profit. For example, if Book 1 considers Team A to be worth +200 (2-to-1 underdog), and Book 2 considers Team B to be worth +200, a bettor can bet Team A at Book 1, and Team B at Book 2, and guarantee a 100% profit. This is a no-risk bet, as the player is guaranteed a profit no matter the result of the game.

Famous US handicappers
The first very well known sports handicapper in American culture was Jimmy "The Greek" Snyder. During his career he worked for CBS on their Sunday morning show, The NFL Today. Because sports betting had a social taboo at the time, Snyder was not allowed to mention betting on games specifically. Instead, he would predict the score. Over the years the attitude towards sports betting, and handicapping in general, has changed. Billy Walters was profiled by 60 Minutes because of his handicapping abilities. Billy Walters, and other unknown members of the Computer Group, developed a system for handicapping games and beating Las Vegas sportsbooks. The Huffington Post covered Jon Price a reclusive sports bettor that hires Ph.D's and works off of algorithmic information for his predictions. ESPN wrote an article on Haralabos Voulgaris naming him as the one of the premier NBA handicappers in the world. He claims to have developed a system that uses advanced statistical analysis to predict the outcomes of games. In the past, very few people did any mathematical calculations when handicapping sporting events. Predictions were usually made from hunches or information not readily available to the public. However, with the advancement of technology computers powerful enough to run advanced simulation models now frequent homes and offices. Advanced statistics such as DVOA, Win Shares and Points per Possession are talked about in mainstream media. Brian Burke, author of The Fifth Down blog featured in The New York Times, wrote a formula using advanced statistical techniques that has shown consistency correctly predicting NFL winners. Handicapping, as a profession, is very similar to being a stock analyst. Like Wall Street did in the 1970s, the sports handicapping industry is undergoing a quantitative revolution. Many successful handicappers also use money management systems similar to financial investment professionals. The most popular, and mathematically superior, system is the Kelly criterion. It is a formula for maximizing profits and minimizing losses based on payout odds and win probability of the underlying asset. The Kelly criterion is often used to determine units in sports betting which some handicappers assign to weight each prediction.

title: Handicapping


text:
Portal:Mathematics/Where to start

 * Mathematics
 * History of mathematics
 * Areas of mathematics
 * Pure mathematics
 * Applied mathematics

title: Portal:Mathematics/Where to start